Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War II

 PC
  • Publisher: THQ
  • Release Date: Feb 18, 2009
User Score
8.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1628 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,230 out of 1628
  2. Mixed: 200 out of 1628
  3. Negative: 198 out of 1628
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. RamzaB
    Feb 22, 2009
    6
    Too easy, too slow, boring, lack of multiplayer maps. Campaign dull and repetitive. Lack of units, no base building, races way too similar. Annoying multiplayer bugs, requires Steam and Games for Windows which are more often than not a big problem rather than a help or improvment for the user. Saving grace? Graphics, that's it.
  2. AndreiP
    Feb 24, 2009
    6
    Three steps forward, ten steps back. This is more or less what Relic achieved with their newest title. First of all I'd like to state I have nothing against the lack of base building nor the squad-like mechanics. I simply dislike how this game not only failed to improve upon what was poor in the first, but utterly ignored the specific issues completely. The story is a cliche and the Three steps forward, ten steps back. This is more or less what Relic achieved with their newest title. First of all I'd like to state I have nothing against the lack of base building nor the squad-like mechanics. I simply dislike how this game not only failed to improve upon what was poor in the first, but utterly ignored the specific issues completely. The story is a cliche and the way it's told by audio briefings doesn't help in any way. Cutscenes or any other noteworthy methods of storytelling are nowhere to be found in Relic's title. The plot is predictable, the characters are stereotypical and the writing is simply dull. It's like they didn't even try - a shame, for the IP is great. The singleplayer is a borefest to normal players. People which enjoy grinding for XP and Items on the same maps time and time again, might enjoy it though. After playing the same maps over and over, either defending or seeking a boss, you'll start wondering why you bought a 50 Euro game rather than downloading a Korean MMO for free. The gameplay, is not particularly bad, but for those that played Company of Heroes, it's nothing new either. However, I personally found DoW 2 more enjoyable than the first game in this respect, so Relic's idea was commendable. The only problem that plagues both the singleplayer and the multiplayer are the mildly unresponsive units. When you're seeking to destroy your Eldar friend and your 3 tanks get stuck without any means of getting them out, it's slightly irritating. Dawn of War 2 had great potential, yet it feels like a rushed and unfinished product. The interface, is rather uncomfortable and has a grotesque 90's look. Matchmaking is a pain, despite the use of Live. There are very few maps to be having fun in multiplayer, most of which you'll already be sick of after finishing the campaign. Ultimately, the game doesn't deserve anything above an 8 even if you're completely uninterested in story elements. If you're expecting an epic, engaging and sentimental tale in DoW 2 and value storylines a great deal, this is a 5-6 grade game, and that's being polite. I… Expand
  3. JamesD
    Feb 27, 2009
    6
    Other than the tedious STEAM installation process and forcing of update game that does not even support resume, this is by far not worth to purchase. No internet, and you can't play this game. I'll give a 6 for this, installation to make users feel comfortable to install should be top priority instead of going through heaven and hell get this game running.
  4. AdamJ
    Mar 3, 2009
    6
    Fatal flaw in the pop cap double counting whenever I am reinforcing error. Get it fixed Relic. I spent $50 on this and I don't want to have to work around bugs like this when I spend so much for a game. And if you can't release a game without jeopardizing the quality of your other games (IE COH), then dont release a game until then.
  5. JohnCerril
    May 20, 2009
    6
    Great campaign, great multiplayer gameplay... if evenly matched. The TrueSkill in this game is so broken that I am quitting until they remove it from the system. It's a game I like to have fun in, and fun for me is not getting blasted by Rank 52 TrueSkill 36 people. Replay value plays heavily into my rating of all games, seeing as longevity is key in purchases.
  6. WilC
    May 6, 2009
    6
    While the game is visually impressive and fast paced, it may be too much so for anyone who was expecting something similar to the previous incarnations of the franchise. Base building is all but gone and the scale of combat has become small and squad-centric; somewhat like a bird's eye view of a first-person shooter playing out below.
  7. FrankieE
    Aug 3, 2009
    6
    Ok where do it start!? As a hardcore 40K fan and a massive fan of the previous DOW titles i can say that i am disspointed with this game. Whilst i understand that relic wanted to change and go somewhere new, they have in fact gone backwards... allot. Multiplayers is not worthwhile, we have lost a major aspect of the game. You can no longer build buildings which has removed a massive side Ok where do it start!? As a hardcore 40K fan and a massive fan of the previous DOW titles i can say that i am disspointed with this game. Whilst i understand that relic wanted to change and go somewhere new, they have in fact gone backwards... allot. Multiplayers is not worthwhile, we have lost a major aspect of the game. You can no longer build buildings which has removed a massive side of the game, you no longer have to build to gain new equipment and you cant attack/defend these postions which gave the previous titles an edge. Also you cannot build massive armys which removes the whole "War" aspect. Add to this list the fact you only have 4 races to play with. On a more positive side, single player is very addictive and i like the customize the squad feature, its a shame you can use these players in multiplayer. Also the introduction of the tyranids is a godsend.… Expand
  8. JamesW
    Jan 22, 2010
    6
    Due to the overwhelming positive review and the good experience from the first Dawn of War, I bought this game without much hesitance. After having tried the single player and multiplayer mode, I am hugely disappointed. Frist of, the single player campaign is boring. It is the first time in my life that I fell a sleep while playing an RTS (literally). All you do is just looking at your Due to the overwhelming positive review and the good experience from the first Dawn of War, I bought this game without much hesitance. After having tried the single player and multiplayer mode, I am hugely disappointed. Frist of, the single player campaign is boring. It is the first time in my life that I fell a sleep while playing an RTS (literally). All you do is just looking at your same tiny Squad, moving them around the map, setup a good position, let them do automatic shooting, heal, then occasionally use their special ability, and repeat that throughout the game. Multiplayer is almost unplayable. Most of the time the match will be disconnected due to somebody's slow internet or computer. However, the new mode, The Last Stand, was pretty fun to play once in a while. I really try to like Dawn of War II, I have install and uninstall the game more than 4 times, but every time I started playing, it bores me. It is great that Relic try new approach on DOW2, but it lost a lot of the charm from the first game while doing so.… Expand
  9. JohnC
    Feb 21, 2009
    6
    Its a good game but you whether you want to or not you have to install and update the online component before it will even let you play the single player campaign. The graphics and story line are good, not a whole to lot base building, you build up your squads and go bust heads that's about it, a must for any 40K fan.
  10. BritonT
    Feb 21, 2009
    6
    What I Liked: 1.) Visually Stunning 2.) Emphasis more towards a Company of Heroes style game play 3.) At times alot of fun My complains 1.) Unbalanced (not for the newer rts player) 2.) no base building (cant i at least build a barracks please!) 3.) Control and interface set up(not the easiers) 4.) this isn't relative to the game but ( no beta tutorial? someone might want that).
  11. TelJ
    Feb 28, 2009
    6
    Game seems fun, but chokes and dies on XP64. Other games (Supreme Commander, World in Conflict, etc) run just fine at my monitor native res and in Supreme Commander's case, across multiple monitors... but fire up DoW2 and both cores are instantly pegged at 100%, stuttering during the opening cinematic, and an all-out lock within 20 minutes of playing. What I played of it was fun, Game seems fun, but chokes and dies on XP64. Other games (Supreme Commander, World in Conflict, etc) run just fine at my monitor native res and in Supreme Commander's case, across multiple monitors... but fire up DoW2 and both cores are instantly pegged at 100%, stuttering during the opening cinematic, and an all-out lock within 20 minutes of playing. What I played of it was fun, don't get me wrong... I'd just tlike to play more of it. I did notice that if I logged out of GfWL, that processor usage dropped to where I'd expect... of course, you can't play logged out. As soon as I logged back into GfWL, bam, 100%, both cores. Very irritating.… Expand
  12. DanielL.H.
    Mar 2, 2009
    6
    First of this is impossibly long(argh just put pasted in a org document, just around 2.5 pages), so if you're not interested in my personal erm..*cough*rantings*cough* just skip to the end(about halfway through that is) and you'll find a score based evaluation. Otherwise if you want the full story I suggest you get a cup of coffee and adjust the lighting. Wow...I waited sooo First of this is impossibly long(argh just put pasted in a org document, just around 2.5 pages), so if you're not interested in my personal erm..*cough*rantings*cough* just skip to the end(about halfway through that is) and you'll find a score based evaluation. Otherwise if you want the full story I suggest you get a cup of coffee and adjust the lighting. Wow...I waited sooo long for this! After having played all the previous games in the series to the point where I actucally broke a cd and had to go buy a new copy words couldn't express how much I wanted this game: New graphics, updated gameplay, and the Icing, they FINALLY included the tyranids. Baring the untold various types of IG armies, the tyranids were the only thing missing from the games. So off to pre-order as soon as it was announced I ended up standing in line at a midnight sale, not giving much thought that I had to go to work in the morning. bought the games, rushed home ready to play....aaand thats where I lost all my excitement. First of all I had to install STEAM(which I hate for entirely different reasons but lets not get into that here)...which it wouldn't allow me as I didn't have an internet connection(had switched ISP so had almost two weeks with no net) so i went of to bed after hours of trying, royally pissed of. I Finally secured a internet connection two days later(loaned a friends pc at school to registrate) Installed the game, ready to put of a ring of turrets around my Webway and then storm my Enigmatic Eldar off to war. but alas they removed the building concept! and from that point it only got worse. The singleplayer campaign is just tank'n'spank all the way, repetetive as a clockwork machine. and wth are with the boss fights? most of all they seem to serve as a nuisciensce when you think you've completed a level. Next came all the individuel skills and the restrictions of these. Now these are things that work GREAT in the original board game of 40k, it's turnbased and you have more than enough time to go through about 25 special abilities during a ranged or hand to hand combat phase. this, however simply does not work in a RTS game. If you play the game at the speed you're supposed to, there are far too many submenues you have to troll through, jumping from squad to squad anything between 3 and 15 times per second or so. James G said this to be a "true TACTICAL wargame" and he's half right. All the basics are there for this to be a tactical game, but none of them are properly incorporated. Being a former soldier with structure to structure experience I can say that there is no need for any real world tactics to win this game. the only tactical "trick" in this game is to position your devastatorsquad correctly and you've more or less flat out won. Hell, I let my 7yo nephew play and he just made his marines walk from one end of the field to the other, stopping everytime he had to fight, not neccesarily taking cover as he did(this on normal mode btw) The only challenge I got for myself was simply not to use any heavy weapons during the single player campaign. as for the multiplayer... Fastpaced as it may be, I have yet to meet a person who have been able to manage all his squads at the same time(leveling, changing to the correct wargear for the correct type of enemy etc.) in the short amount of time a multiplayer match usually takes. You have so many squads and so many enemy sqauds in such a confined place that half the time your squads will be dead before you have the time to properly use their abilities. Again, the abilites is an aspect that works great in the boardgame(read: turnbased) as you have the time and overlook it takes, but utterly fails in the rts version as there is just too much going on at the same time. This(i believe) is the main reason why I have yet to see anything other than rush tactics in multiplayer. I wholeheartedly belive that trying to use all the different abilities at once is too much for alot fo the people out there and som in order to compensate they just amass the maximum amount of squads and overwhelm the enemy with strenght in numbers. I'm all for making a computerised version of, well pretty much all the GW line of games, but some aspects simply cannot be converted from turnbased to rts. SCORE. Graphics: 9/10 Overall the graphics is great, if you have the comp for it. Bear in mind that even the low settings required a fairly new machine. So stunnign graphics if you jave the comp for it, and crap for the rest of you. To be honest, the game is hardly worth playing in the low setting. Albiet a minus I won't let it drag down the score as it has to be based on a system that actually has the specs to run it. Sounds: 9/10 pretty much the same as graphics. Plot: 6/10 It's compelling it urges you and yet something seems to be missing, at least for a warhammer lore nerd as myself. it also annoys me that they walk you through all the little things in the game. I KNOW what a bolter is, I KNOW how a howling banshee's warcry and powersword work and what they are. I mean, c'mon is it really too much to ask the newbs that have never heard of warhammer before, to read up a little? As an experienced gamer I find it triffling and at times almost insulting that they are trying to teach me everything as if I knew nothing. But to be fair, I can see how this would work well for Relic, as they that way have a chance of picking up new gamers. The dialogue is fair and the voice acting is pulled of with succes for the most cases. Though at times it can be hard to follow some of the dececions of the various characters as they guide you through the campaign. There are too many … Expand
  13. AnonymousMC
    Mar 23, 2009
    6
    A month from release date and the game is riddled with bugs and cheating online. What could have been a great game is tarnished by it's lack of quick support from the developer who did not leave the game in beta long enough to fix bugs known for quite awhile.
  14. TeroS
    May 18, 2009
    6
    This would be a good game, if it weren't so riddled with bugs. From time to time you lose control of your units, my camera sometimes pans endlessly for no reason, teammates sometimes are switched to the opposite team at the games start, occassional you will play as Space Marines when you picked a different race, and the game crashes often enough to be a problem. When it works its This would be a good game, if it weren't so riddled with bugs. From time to time you lose control of your units, my camera sometimes pans endlessly for no reason, teammates sometimes are switched to the opposite team at the games start, occassional you will play as Space Marines when you picked a different race, and the game crashes often enough to be a problem. When it works its very fun, challenging, and fairly balanced between the races. However I will not be playing this much at all until I find these issues resolved.… Expand
  15. JoostL
    Jun 1, 2009
    6
    I love 40k, I loved DoW. In a way we should be glad that they took a different approach on this game rather then just putting a "2" behind this the first part and not changing anything else. However, the single player turns out to be quite dull, to easy and the non-linear campaign style makes it feel like playing random skirmish missions rather then a storyline. The multiplayer is a tad I love 40k, I loved DoW. In a way we should be glad that they took a different approach on this game rather then just putting a "2" behind this the first part and not changing anything else. However, the single player turns out to be quite dull, to easy and the non-linear campaign style makes it feel like playing random skirmish missions rather then a storyline. The multiplayer is a tad better, but the "trueskill" system that is used is weak and it feels to much like a Company of Heroes copy with less options and less controll.… Expand
  16. VegeM
    Jun 7, 2009
    6
    Nice graphics and GUI but the game is too shallow for my liking. Never been a big fan of the standard RTS game so thought this one I might enjoy more because it claimed to be different from all the rest. Sure, the difference is that it is even less shallow than other RTS games because all there is to the game is simple sheep herding and finding cover. Boring!
  17. StiabhD.
    Nov 17, 2009
    6
    Hugely disappointing. Firstly, I resent having to be online to install and activate a game I intend to play offline. Secondly, Windows Live is a total copout on the part of Relic. Thirdly, this game is based on Company Of Heroes. You can call it 'inspired by' that game but I say it's nothing more than a derivative copy of that (better) game's mechanics. Fourthly, Where Hugely disappointing. Firstly, I resent having to be online to install and activate a game I intend to play offline. Secondly, Windows Live is a total copout on the part of Relic. Thirdly, this game is based on Company Of Heroes. You can call it 'inspired by' that game but I say it's nothing more than a derivative copy of that (better) game's mechanics. Fourthly, Where Are The Troops??? Where are the other five types of Eldar Aspect warrior and why so many damn limits on squad size? I want hordes of Orks. Not just a posse. Hordes! If Relic are expecting us to queue up meekly and pay for new troop types with each expansion (as happened with DoW) they can guess again. Fifthly, where's my control? I want total control over placement of defensive guns, support structures, resource structures, everything. Instead I'm playing battles against an annoying mapmaker. Lastly, this is NOT Warhammer 40K. Like Dawn of War, it's just a bog standard wargame using Games Workshop's (un)original IP. Why do so many reviewers fail to see that while they're drooling over the pretty graphics and 'splosions.… Expand
  18. KyleD.
    Feb 21, 2009
    6
    This game was rushed out the door. THQ wanted to beat Blizzard and Creative Assembly [Starcraft 2 and Empire Total War, respectively] and decided that releasing sooner, even with an unfinished game was better than releasing later with a polished one. And it shows, it shows in the hacked together singleplayer, and it shows in the beta-level multiplayer. Singleplayer itself is extremely This game was rushed out the door. THQ wanted to beat Blizzard and Creative Assembly [Starcraft 2 and Empire Total War, respectively] and decided that releasing sooner, even with an unfinished game was better than releasing later with a polished one. And it shows, it shows in the hacked together singleplayer, and it shows in the beta-level multiplayer. Singleplayer itself is extremely repetitive, and lacks any sort of interesting design once you've played it for more than three hours. Multiplayer suffers from lack of content and gameplay direction. Relic, even now, is still patching in new elements that change the fundamental way mutliplayer is played - and not for the better. The game only released with 7 multiplayer maps too, giving an indication of just how rushed this really was. Further, Relic has opted to go with Steam for their DRM, which caused countless problems for people buying the game - as Steam didn't validate it until the 20th, but it was on sale since the 17th. Then the Steam servers went down on the 20th, for maintenance, too. What a horrible DRM system, they should've released through Stardock.… Expand
  19. MasterO
    Feb 22, 2009
    6
    Gameplay is a bit lacklustre. Strategy (whilst it is there) seems to be dummed down 'for the masses'. The units feel 'clunky' and overall playing the game lacks finesse. I was expecting something a bit like a meccano set and all I ended up with was Duplo. Kudos for trying something dfferent with the genre
  20. ThomasL
    Feb 23, 2009
    6
    Brought this game with high hopes dispite the dissapointing beta. In a way I'm glad I did as the campaign section of the game is very well executed and finished off with well designed maps (even though you are sometimes forced to play the same map several times) that give a good sense of balance to games and allow for many different tactics to be used, the storyline is good and on Brought this game with high hopes dispite the dissapointing beta. In a way I'm glad I did as the campaign section of the game is very well executed and finished off with well designed maps (even though you are sometimes forced to play the same map several times) that give a good sense of balance to games and allow for many different tactics to be used, the storyline is good and on the whole it and the gameplay fit along well with the tabletop version, this seems to go slightly out the window on the highest difficulty settings however as even the weedy tyranid gaunts seem to bulk up there armour tenfold whereas every unit in your army seems to gain un unhealthy weakness to bullets which can be aggrevating. On the subject of aggrevating the boss fights on harder difficulties are also worth a mention as the producers in their wisdom decided to create bosses that have huge ammounts of health (some upwards of 150,000), usualy 1 hit kill your units and summon more weaker units just when you start to hurt them. Oh and they regenerate health as well. Despite these moans this does make for a challenging fight that requires tactics. If the game only included campaign then I would have given it a 9 but horrid multiplayer drags it down for me. Yes I know the producers told us that there would be much less base building, but they neglegted to tell us that your base consists of a nigh on indestructable base building. And the whole cover thing doesent work online as most people online resort to spamming so many orks or tyranids that your units are swarmed before they can do anything. I know that many people will like these changes but I'm going to play campaign some more then move back to soulstorm.… Expand
  21. G_Mackzy
    Dec 6, 2011
    6
    In dire need of a real time strategy game I got this for a steal on Steam. It's a nice game and I must stress as someone who had no clue what Warhammer was until this YOU DON"T NEED TO BE FAMILIAR WITH THE SERIES TO LIKE THIS GAME.
  22. Coldspyros
    Mar 11, 2011
    6
    I think the best thing (in my eyes) of this game is the graphics. The graphics are a huge improvement over DOW I and any other RTS I've ever played (and I've played most of the major ones, SC2, Company of Heroes, Supreme Commander I and II, etc etc).
    That's the main good thing I liked. That and how the gameplay revolves more around combat rather than resource gathering. And, of course, the    I think the best thing (in my eyes) of this game is the graphics. The graphics are a huge improvement over DOW I and any other RTS I've ever played (and I've played most of the major ones, SC2, Company of Heroes, Supreme Commander I and II, etc etc).
    That's the main good thing I liked. That and how the gameplay revolves more around combat rather than resource gathering. And, of course, the fact that it features the Imperium.

    The thing that I didn't like about this game was that it had very small army sizes, and VERY small battles. This is a step down from DOW I, where you could actually command armies. In DOW II, you get a few squads, and that's it, you're stuck with them. No building squads, no calling in reinforcement squads, nothing. You choose four for each mission and you're stuck with them. This needs a serious fix in the next game.
    Second, the campaign is more of an RTS/RPG hybrid rather than a true RTS. You choose equipment for each character, and decide what each character brings. In regular RTS's, you don't get to do that, each squad has a specialty, and you know their abilities. So it's not a true RTS, but rather an RTS/RPG hybrid.

    Hopefully the next game will be better.    … Expand
  23. Empyrea
    Sep 29, 2019
    6
    If you are a fan of Warhammer 40k you may rate this game with an 8 or more but even if you are not a fan, this is a decent game with nice graphics. Voices in Spanish were good although they were not syncronized with the lips (I bet in English it's far better). I played for almost 5 hours (this is till 12th mission out of 17th) until I got stuck. I probably could keep advancing in the gameIf you are a fan of Warhammer 40k you may rate this game with an 8 or more but even if you are not a fan, this is a decent game with nice graphics. Voices in Spanish were good although they were not syncronized with the lips (I bet in English it's far better). I played for almost 5 hours (this is till 12th mission out of 17th) until I got stuck. I probably could keep advancing in the game but because it's a shooting game I don't care if I don't finish it. I recommend to play one hour a day or at least rest for 10-15 minutes for every hour because this is an stressful game so you can get your eyes red if you are not careful. Remember to blink from time to time. Overall, I wouldn't give to this game more than a 7 unless you are very fan of Warhammer games.… Expand
  24. W1llhelm
    Jun 23, 2023
    6
    Decent game, awful boss fights at higher difficulty settings, very repetitive maps and enemy layouts, close to no "strategy" involved as you'll find yourself using the same combination of abilities the entire playthrough regardless of enemies and locations.
  25. JedL
    Mar 21, 2009
    5
    By itself, DOW 2 is a competent and reasonably well-polished RTT with nice visuals and fx, but a bit underwhelming in terms of SP and even MP gameplay. As a successor to DoW, it is a total failure that never does deliver on the promises of picking up where it's predecessor left off and bringing the series closer to Warhammer 40K fluff and TT. Much of the strategy and gameplay options By itself, DOW 2 is a competent and reasonably well-polished RTT with nice visuals and fx, but a bit underwhelming in terms of SP and even MP gameplay. As a successor to DoW, it is a total failure that never does deliver on the promises of picking up where it's predecessor left off and bringing the series closer to Warhammer 40K fluff and TT. Much of the strategy and gameplay options that were present in Dawn of War and Company of Heroes are sorely missing here and much of the game seems rushed and contrived. Not a keeper in my collection...I'll stick with DOW and COH thank you very much.… Expand
  26. KenM
    Mar 1, 2009
    5
    Like most games, there is a challenge to recreate an experience that is enjoyable regardless the operating system. Both XP and Vista have extremem issue with the way this product uses system resources. It should be unnecessary to strip startup apps and other system features to enjoy a product as purchased. Also this idea that I must run a started client for Steam to obtain patches and Like most games, there is a challenge to recreate an experience that is enjoyable regardless the operating system. Both XP and Vista have extremem issue with the way this product uses system resources. It should be unnecessary to strip startup apps and other system features to enjoy a product as purchased. Also this idea that I must run a started client for Steam to obtain patches and enjoy the experience is simply outrageous. I see this product coming off the shelves as soon as Starcraft 2 is released.… Expand
  27. GuyWalbe
    Mar 21, 2009
    5
    This game is only marginally an RTS and should not have been marketed as one. It is more akin to Real time tactical/RPG the likes of Mechcommander or the Commandos series of games. It is neither as fun as the original Dawn of War series, nor as polished as the Company of Heroes series, which it takes most of its ideas from. It is an inferior RTS game and would not be worth mentioningThis game is only marginally an RTS and should not have been marketed as one. It is more akin to Real time tactical/RPG the likes of Mechcommander or the Commandos series of games. It is neither as fun as the original Dawn of War series, nor as polished as the Company of Heroes series, which it takes most of its ideas from. It is an inferior RTS game and would not be worth mentioning were it not for the -short- Singleplayer.… Expand
  28. Fenon
    Mar 2, 2009
    5
    I found the graphics for this game to be undesirable, all that shine just doesn't look right on the battle hardened damaged space marines. And you can't help but compare it unfavourably to DoW, it's much less of a game and while I played DoW for months without getting bored, I was bored of DoW2 within the first day. We were told that the reason DoW didn't have Tyranids I found the graphics for this game to be undesirable, all that shine just doesn't look right on the battle hardened damaged space marines. And you can't help but compare it unfavourably to DoW, it's much less of a game and while I played DoW for months without getting bored, I was bored of DoW2 within the first day. We were told that the reason DoW didn't have Tyranids was because they couldn't do them justice on the old engine, but I fail to see how DoW2 has done anything at all any justice. There are only two saving graces for DoW2, the excellent cover system and it's modding community who I'm hoping will undo all the damage that has been done to the DoW series. If you are looking for a Warhammer 40K game get the first Dawn of War game and it's expansions, it's vastly better, you won't easily get bored of it and hopefully by the time you do, those wonderful modders will have worked their magic to make DoW2 a playable game deserving of it's name.… Expand
  29. STeveSteve
    Sep 17, 2009
    5
    The over hyped campaign was lame. The biggest screwup was creating a dump mp. There is nothing inherently wrong with no base building. The flaw is that the MP is treated like its a base building game which totally ruined the game.
  30. FrankL
    Sep 9, 2009
    5
    Major disappointment. I awaited this title with much anticipation. I have been a Games Workshop enthusiast for 18 years and am a great fan of the first Dawn of War. First, before I go into how much of a waste this game is... I would like to say I really liked the Tyranids. The makers totally screwed this game up. Everything you loved about the first Dawn of War has been removed. Their is Major disappointment. I awaited this title with much anticipation. I have been a Games Workshop enthusiast for 18 years and am a great fan of the first Dawn of War. First, before I go into how much of a waste this game is... I would like to say I really liked the Tyranids. The makers totally screwed this game up. Everything you loved about the first Dawn of War has been removed. Their is no longer a feeling of large battles. The multiplayer aspect of the game is so bland that makes you want to shoot yourself in the head. You cant shake the feeling that this game is under cooked. All your strategic options have vanished and to make things worse the maps are much smaller than the original. Space Marines with 3 man squads made me want to shove this game up the programmers rear end. How can you fail at making a game with the War Hammer 40k title behind it? These people did.… Expand
Page:

Awards & Rankings

16
#16 Best PC Game of 2009
9
#9 Most Discussed PC Game of 2009
19
#19 Most Shared PC Game of 2009

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
85

Generally favorable reviews - based on 67 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 64 out of 67
  2. Mixed: 3 out of 67
  3. Negative: 0 out of 67
  1. PALGN
    85
    The single-player mash-up of RTS and RPG elements works really well, and the multiplayer is fast and exciting. Relic's reinvention of the Dawn of War brand is a breath of fresh (or possibly fetid, Tyranid infested) air.
    Read full review
  2. YouGamers
    89
    Dawn of War II is a highly innovative twist on the usual RTS formula that dares to think outside the box while staying true to the WH40k source material. Campaign co-op play is a great addition to the already superb single player game but the head-to-head multiplayer skirmish is a bit of a disappointment.
    Read full review
  3. GameShark
    83
    Dawn of War was a finely tuned game with huge battles and many disposable troops. Dawn of War II is faster, lighter, smaller, in some ways more interesting and in other ways somewhat lacking in its execution. But taken as a whole it’s impossible to not recommend the game to 40K fans and to those who are willing to accept that this is not a linear sequel to an aging franchise.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »