In fact for a game that's a relic by usual PC standards, Company of Heroes is still the best-looking RTS on the market.

On the face of it Tales of Valor is more of the same, especially when you're forced to watch someone else have all the fun before you're allowed to get your hands on it It looks great, of course. The abstraction sent me running back to the game that spawned it And there I remained, until I was asked to meet the lead designer on Tales of Valor, who happened to be stopping by with an early version of what I thought would just be more of the same.

But having to ring your troops around a flagpole in a field that seemed to hold no strategic value, in the grit and grime of WWII, didn't fit the reality. I felt, and still do, that the capture-and-hold mechanic felt natural in the Warhammer 40,000 universe, because it's based on a big nerdy board game with garish colours. I go all weak at the knees over WWII strategy games too, but Company of Heroes didn't really jelly me up as much as it did others, simply because it was just too much like playing Dawn of War. I'm looking forward to its sequel as much as anyone else. This is a good thing.ĭon't get me wrong, I liked Dawn of War a lot I still do.

Well, actually, perhaps not While it would seem the standalone expansion Tales of Valor - the second to bless 2006's Company of Heroes - is set firmly in the WWII timeline and is of the real-time strategy genus, one thing it certainly isn't - or at least isn't planned to be - is another Dawn of War. another WWII game, another click-and-drag RTS, effectively another Dawn of War expansion pack.

Company of heroes tales of valor iso