It's not difficult to make a historically accurate game, anyone could do that. Surely there must be more than the historical accuracy in FH2 that appeal to all the players?
Its not just historically accurate. And it is NOT.
Fh2 is more about the feel of WWII. The FEEL is the most important aspect. It is based, imo, on something like 80 - 90% accuracy and 10% 'tweaking' . What I mean is this, you are playing a scaled game - Most Maps are not the real size as the battles, but some are. So you need to start off with as much reality as you can, then scale the aspects of play in such a way that it works for both 1:1 scaled maps and 1: X scaled maps without it appearing arcade for the former, or too brutal for the latter.
You recall how howitzers, even tanks lobed shells in BF42, that level of scaling cannot work, as it takes you out of the sense of WWII, you spend more time getting the lobe quotient right to trying fire straight (The way we perceive a tank to). Sure there is shell drop, but it is not like firing mortar. Then there is the range to consider.
BF42 indeed, was going for something similar to what FH2 was going for... But from the other direction. It was more concerned about 'fun' than realism in achieving its WWII feel, so it put in tanks as needed to make it fun, rather than given the real feel.
It did mean it was easier for FH1 to reach its full size and self, because the content was there - It just needed to be tweaked, and more... ALOT more added later.
Fh2 is basically working of a blank canvas. The engine difference means that it cannot simply refer to FH1 figures and mimic that. And BF2 offers little point of reference for a WWII, if that.
What it DOES need to do, irrespective of which players come along, and I dare say, which DEVS come along, is a proper sense of its being - The reason Forgotten Hope as a franchise existed in the first place. Otherwise FH2 will not respect the Forgotten Hope theme.
The 'feel' of WWII can be seen from the reviews. Fh1 was described with the term 'realism', 'WWII experience'. BF42 was described as 'Hollywood version of WWII', 'Arcade', 'Balanced' (Although balanced here means 'mirrored', not 'fair'). There are differences between these descriptions.
Forgotten Hope is supposed to be grittier than BF42... ALOT more, but it does have something of a cushion that prevents it from becoming a WWII simulator. Especially, because of the fact that, in its scaled World, perfect realsim will only frustrate players, NOT give them a sense of WWII-speed and intensity at ALL.
If the reviewer didn't see these themes, then it may be either his pespective being the exception, OR the fact that FH2 has changed the game. These things are for the devs to deliberate on, and to act accordingly.... Its not something we can slug it out here to fix, or understand.
What was the devs' plan for Forgotten Hope back in 2003... And what is it today?
FH2 has the potential to be more than Fh1 because, imo, its engine is more complex in its simulation of combat. Besides a few exceptions like mobility kill, Fh1 was based on a rather arcade game with little depth for each aspect of play. But the 'Philosophy' is what needs to be looked at, NOT the engine limitations.
