Company of Heroes was well received when it came out on PC, spawning a pair of expansion packs in the process. Relic Entertainment is hoping to make lightning strike twice with the upcoming release of the sequel, Company of Heroes 2. Set during the height of World War II, the perspective has shifted from the Western Allies to that of the Russian offensive.
Relic Entertainment game director, Quinn Duffy, shared some insight into the creation of the sequel.
Is it tough to create licensed and original titles?
Relic Entertainment game director, Quinn Duffy (QD): Not especially, as multiple titles are hard regardless. What’s really tough is juggling a new IP and a new engine on one project. I’ve personally done that three times now with Homeworld, Impossible Creatures, and Company of Heroes. Building new technology is hard, defining a new IP and new fiction is hard, building new and innovative gameplay is hard. Putting it all together is nearly heartbreaking. So Homeworld took a long time, Impossible Creatures took way too long, and Company of Heroes took something like 44 months. Licensed IP removes some of that risk, but even adapting a known and loved license to new types of games is really tough. The look and feel of Space Marine, for instance, was very different from the first Dawn of War and its sequel. There are still lessons to learn every time you do a new game.
What was the market response to the original Company of Heroes?
QD: Shock maybe? Awe? [Laughs] Our first brush with consumers is actually from within the team, as we’re all game and entertainment consumers, so we can extrapolate a bit from our own experiences. When a game reaches a certain visual and functional critical mass, like when we complete a big demo, you can really assess a game like a gamer would because you’re looking at something close to a finished product. When I finally saw Company of Heroes in a “finished” state, I was staggered at its level of detail and audio. After that, you get a chance to gauge reaction at big shows like E3. Again, not real consumers, but maybe even more valuable because they’re industry professionals and they can be, or pretend to be, jaded.
What do you remember about that development period?
QD: I remember demoing the original Company of Heroes on the floor at E3 in 2006. The first thing I would do is zoom the camera in on the infantry so you could see they actually had five fingers. That would make jaws drop, because RTSs just don’t apply that level of detail. We still get first time reactions to Company of Heroes because we just recently set some new records for concurrency. We’re getting similar reactions to Company of Heroes 2. I love how our recent press events have gone, and I love the reactions of those who have seen the game in the flesh. It’s deeply gratifying.
Is the development of the sequel the same as before?
QD: This development has been quite a bit different in some areas. For example, we have a smaller, more focused team, as Company of Heroes peaked at over 100, and we have a better sense of our goals. We also have some more maturity and a better sense of what quality means. As for what’s the same, we have powerful new technology and gameplay systems that we learn how to better leverage on nearly a daily basis, we still have a lot of passion for history and authenticity, and we have a lot of fun working on the game.
What is being done to build upon the experience?
QD: There are a few things, or maybe it’s really just one thing looked at a few different ways. I love the way the game feels and we’ve added some cool new features, but the game still has that Company of Heroes essence. In fact, I think the new features help focus on the tactical even more and really help supplement, and improve the original gameplay. For example, flanking was important in the original game, but flanking in Company of Heroes 2 feels so much better with the new True Sight line of sight system and infantry vaulting. We really want to present a full experience to the player, and that’s something I think the franchise has always done well. We try to make sure every ability, every point of contact, every discipline is contributing to the design of a feature so the game looks, feels, and sounds right.
What is shaping up to be the most interesting aspect?
QD: If I had to pick one thing, I’d say I’m most interested in seeing how the fans respond to the gameplay and everything we’ve built to engage them. We have a great story to tell, and we have amazing presentation. The game looks incredible right now, but those things help sell the gameplay, and I want to see what people think of the new stuff.
Is the state of PC gaming as dire as people think?
QD: No, I think the PC has officially died three times during my career, and those that forget history are doomed to repeat it. PC still offers a premiere experience, especially for the kinds of games we build here. There are really big games on PCs that either sell millions in their first weeks, or earn millions every week from huge player bases, so PC is definitely not dead. I’d argue PC developers are really well placed to adapt to whatever the future brings and that maybe we’re entering a new renaissance.
So what is your take on the subject?
QD: I think the way people consume games is changing due to the rise of always-on connectivity, tablets and other powerful mobile devices, Ultrabooks, PCs we don’t recognize as PCs, and Cloud storage. It really means you could enjoy the same game five different ways during the day on a variety of devices. However, I think the PC will always be a strong, core part of that matrix of entertainment options.
Any chance of a Homeworld 3?
QD: Sure, there’s always a chance. Mathematical probabilities are so interesting. [Laughs]
Want to read other video game interviews with key figures from Sony, Microsoft and more? Then check out Good Gear Guide's complete interview archive. Follow Good Gear Guide Games on Twitter at @GameProAu or become a fan of the Facebook page.