Men of War

Game

Dave James - 4 March 2009 - 1:53pm

Price £30 Publisher 505 Games Developer Best Way

Russian wargames have never been so good. And that's not sarcasm neither

We’ve got to break the back of this last vestige of German resistance, but all I want to do is to get back to my best gal. “I bet they’re bored with playing harmonica and eating pork,” Private Jenkins intones in his strained, almost German, American accent. He’s a dick; I hope he dies in the first attack.

Stifling a smirk at the dodgy script localisation, badly compressed intro movie, and clunky characterisation, I settled down to play what I assumed was another World War II strategy game desperate for a bit of that Company of Heroes magic. I was fairly happy with this, the Relic game being one of my favourites, and I was content to indulge in a bit of mindless WWII nostalgia. But, apart from the title (which it shares with Dolph Lundgren’s forgettable firearms-fetishist flick), Men of War turned out to be anything but mindless.

Okay, some of the initial presentation is a bit irksome – especially the abysmal, let’s-just-get-the-overenthusiastic-playtesters-to-do-it voice-acting – but the rest of the game is a strategic masterpiece. I can confidently say Men of War (MoW) is by some distance the most comprehensive WWII strategy game that I’ve ever had the pleasure of playing. Sure, there may be similarities between this and Company of Heroes, but it’s anything but a lazy copy, and even beats the next CoH expansion to the punch by being first to include direct control of any of your units in the game.

The scope and scale is vast. Three full campaigns, cover Soviet, German and British points of view, plus five bonus missions. A host of multiplayer options includes the ability to play all single-player missions in co-op, and adds US and Japan to the playable factions.
The individual missions vary greatly too, from huge, sprawling battles with hundreds of troops to small-scale, stealth-dependent ops. The game engine is adaptable enough for you to be able to play across this spectrum without feeling like there’s been a compromise anywhere. MoW plays like a cross between Company of Heroes, the old Commandos games and a traditional RPG, like (the admittedly lacklustre) Hammer and Sickle.

Each of the 50 or so individual unit types has an inventory, detailing armour, weaponry and ammo. Yes, individual bullets. A squad runs out of them and it’s down to scratching enemies’ eyes out with their fingernails or resorting to harsh language. On some missions, the ability to harvest from corpses then adopt, adapt and improve is vital, particularly the first forays into the Allied and German campaigns where you start off with very limited resources.

By this point, I’m sure you’ve scanned ahead to the score, and are wondering why this isn’t getting a PCF Gold Award when I’ve been gushingly complimentary about it so far. Well, with the Gold Award you simply have to play the game. Or we’ll personally replace your blood with our own urine – it’s the only way you’ll learn – but I simply can’t recommend that punishment with Men of War. It’s punishing enough.

I loved it: so many times, I discovered some extra little nuance that made me grin from ear to ear, but it’s an incredibly punishing game; and boy, does it require some time investment from you. You can save the game at any point (believe me, you’ll need to) but each of mission will take at the very least an hour to play through, oftentimes far more.

It’s hard. Really hard. Even playing on the easy setting, the game still regularly hoofed my slovenly, non-military balls all across war-torn Europe. I never felt at any point like they were doing a Yoda and wanting the impossible, but still after playing through a mission for an hour only to fail right at the end tends to stop you wanting to go through that all again right away…
Dave James

PCF 84%

+ Comprehensive
+ Impressive engine
+ So much game...
- But soooo tough

It's a hard game, but that challenge and scope will be what keeps you coming back after your arse is handed to you. Again.

Needs: 2.6GHz CPU, 1GB RAM, 128MB DX9c card
Wants: Dual-core CPU, 2GB RAM, 512MB DX9c card

Dave James's blog

Anonymous
6 March 2009 - 6:54pm

Direct control

Decent review i suppose, but to mark it down a bit for being too hard ?? Not sure about that. Dave James praises Company of heroes,(which is a good game)but more importantly mentions beating CoH to the punch with direct control. Does the reviewer realise who made this game? These are the programmers who created not only the great Faces of War (FoW), but also the superb 'Soldiers - heroes of WWII', both of which also employed (make that created) the said direct control input. So if anybody did the copying here it surely must be the creators of CoH. Yes?

Dave James
11 March 2009 - 5:17pm

Re: Direct control

Unfortunately there's going to be a good number of people that wont take the punishing gameplay of Men of War. It's not just the fact that it's a bit hard, it's the fact that it sometimes feels like it's punishing you. And also the presentation of the game is pretty poor - especially the laughable voiceover and acting. These are the reasons that I couldn't in all good conscience give it a gold award.

As for Faces and Soldiers (agreed, both decent stabs at RTS from the same devs, though not quite on the level of Men of War) yes those both have direct control, but i just wanted to make the point that it most definitely wasn't a CoH copy, it's got features that the Relic title didn't have. I guess i should've made that more clear :)

Anonymous (not verified)
18 March 2009 - 2:56pm

After playing Soldiers :

After playing Soldiers : HoWW2 and the moving onto CoH, CoH felt like a poor mans attempt to make a more commercial version of the game. It was also far more flawed, especially on missions where you could build the Pershing Heavy Tank - once you reached that stage you could easily win the entire map. On the Best Way series, however, there is always the chance you will get taken out by an AT grenade or 88 hit if you go rambo with a tank. Its also far more rewarding due to its complexity and the sense of achievement you get from beating a tough level. I wish all games were this complex and deep without being impenetrable.

Zoran (not verified)
24 March 2009 - 11:48pm

Post new comment

Buy PC Format Now and save 30%

the Latest Magazine

Look at that thing on the cover! What is it? A nuclear power station? A Combine base from Half-Life 2? A rejected robot from Transforminators? No, it's a PC! A hulking great compartmentalised beast of a PC. In ten years, all PCs will look like this. Even your Mum's. Adam Oxford's produced a complete guide to future tech, so you'll know exactly what to spend your cash on to build the PC of the future.

Of course, the most important part of your PC is the CPU. There are a fair few bargains out there from AMD and Intel. Jeremy Laird has given them a run for their money, and written masses on each and every one. An essential guide for now, and the future. Jeremy also tried Intel's mobile Core i7 and Core i5 chips, which feature integrated GPUs and will be heading to a laptop near you soon.