GamingPickz
Game vs game · side by side

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront vs Chivalry: Medieval Warfare

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront is a simulation strategy game from Barbedwire Studios (2021) while Chivalry: Medieval Warfare is an FPS simulation game from Torn Banner Studios (2012).

Quick answer: Chivalry: Medieval Warfare rates higher, 7.6 to 7.5 on the GamingPickz Score, and Chivalry: Medieval Warfare is the cheaper at $24.99.

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront

2021 · Barbedwire Studios

7.5GamingPickz Score

$34.99

Steam: Very Positive

Chivalry: Medieval Warfare

2012 · Torn Banner Studios

7.6GamingPickz Score

$24.99

Steam: Very Positive

What each one is

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront is filed under Simulation and Strategy. In contrast, Chivalry: Medieval Warfare under FPS and Simulation.

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell is a realistic RTS/ RTT game that offers endless replay value. Command all types of troops in historical singleplayer, dynamic campaign, PvP and PvE battles. Are you ready for some serious immersion in World War 2?

Description from its Steam store page

Chivalry: Medieval Warfare

Besiege castles and raid villages in Chivalry: Medieval Warfare, a fast-paced medieval first person slasher with a focus on multiplayer battles

Description from its Steam store page

Story, characters and reception

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront

No Wikipedia detail on file.

Chivalry: Medieval Warfare
Reception

Critical reception Reception The game received generally favorable reviews with a Metacritic score of 79/100 based on 24 different critics. IGN gave it a 7. 9/10, praising its medieval style ultra-violent multiplayer gameplay, but also mentioned that the game had a limited number of classes. (Wikipedia)

At a glance

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: OstfrontChivalry: Medieval Warfare
GamingPickz Score7.5/107.6/10
Steam ratingVery Positive (85%, 33,894)Very Positive (83%, 65,058)
Critic aggregateNo aggregate79/100
Price$34.99$24.99
Install size80 GB
Steam Deckunsupportedunsupported
Released20212012
DeveloperBarbedwire StudiosTorn Banner Studios

Prices and Steam ratings are read live and move over time.

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront vs Chivalry: Medieval Warfare, point by point

Each facet side by side. A round is marked won only where a figure settles it; feel and "which is better" carry no mark, because no number we hold decides them.

  1. Genre and premise

    Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: OstfrontSimulation strategy game
    Chivalry: Medieval WarfareFPS simulation game

    What each is filed as. Each game describes itself in full above; we do not judge a premise.

  2. How it plays

    Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: OstfrontWorld War II, Historical, Real Time Tactics
    Chivalry: Medieval WarfareMedieval, Action, Gore

    The tags players apply most, in order of votes. A read on feel, not a verdict.

  3. Reception

    Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: OstfrontScore 7.5 · 85% on Steam
    Chivalry: Medieval WarfareScore 7.6 · 83% on Steam · 79 critic

    The GamingPickz Score is a composite of player sentiment, critics and popularity, computed the same way for every game.

  4. Content and scale

    Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront33,894 reviews · 7 add-ons · 80 GB
    Chivalry: Medieval Warfare65,058 reviews · 2 add-ons

    Reach and footprint, not quality: more reviews or a bigger install is not a better game.

  5. Price

    Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront$34.99
    Chivalry: Medieval Warfare$24.99

    Read live from Steam and subject to change.

  6. On a Steam Deck

    Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: OstfrontUnsupported
    Chivalry: Medieval WarfareUnsupported

    Valve's own Deck compatibility rating.

Chivalry: Medieval Warfare takes 2 of the marked rounds to 0. That is only what a number can decide, not which you will enjoy more.

The two on the grid

Compare the whole catalogue

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront and Chivalry: Medieval Warfare on the axes the GamingPickz Score is built from, on the full 0 to 100 scale so each dot is its real position. Change either axis to compare them on any measure.

2 games have both

01000100PlayersPopularity

Players. The share of Steam reviews marked positive, pulled toward the catalogue average in proportion to how few reviews stand behind it. A game with 200 reviews moves a long way toward the average; one with 200,000 barely moves at all. Without this a title sitting at 100 percent on nine reviews outranks Half-Life 2 at 98 percent on 278,000.

Popularity. A blend of two things that are not the same. Audience is how many people wrote a Steam review, which is a floor on how many played it. Reach is how many language editions of Wikipedia document the game, which is cultural footprint rather than sales. A game can score high on one and low on the other: a huge free-to-play title has audience without reach, and a landmark console exclusive has reach without a Steam audience at all. Where both exist they are averaged; where only one does, that one carries it.

  • PC

Every point links to that game's entry. The value map and the reception map are fixed views of the same data.

See the whole grid

How positions are decided

No paid placement, no favouritism, live third-party data
  • Placed by the published method, not by us. Every coordinate is computed from the axis definitions and weights printed on this site. Nobody moves a point. See the axes.
  • Nothing here is paid for. No sponsored placements, no promoted slots, no arrangement of any kind affects a position. If that ever changes it will be labelled and sit outside the ranking.
  • No favouritism, including our own. The 16 games we have written full reviews of are scored by exactly the same formula as the other 1,510, from the same third-party inputs, and they land where it puts them. Our own opinion of a game does not enter its coordinates.
  • A position is not an endorsement. It says how a game was received and what it costs, not that we recommend it. Where we do recommend something, it carries a written review with a name on it.
  • Fetched from live third-party data. Player sentiment from Steam, critic aggregates as published on store pages, prices checked hourly, attention from Wikipedia. Each figure carries its source and the date it was read, and we do not adjust any of them.

Which to pick, by what you want

  • The cheaper right now: Chivalry: Medieval Warfare ($24.99)

What they have in common

Both are tagged by Steam players with:

HistoricalThird PersonMultiplayerPvP

Where they differ

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront is also

World War IIReal Time TacticsStrategyRTSWarSingleplayer

Chivalry: Medieval Warfare is also

MedievalActionGoreFirst-PersonSwordplayViolent

Tags players apply to one game and not the other.

Difficulty and who each is for

By the tags players apply, Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront is middle-of-the-road on difficulty. Chivalry: Medieval Warfare is demanding, for players who want a challenge.

System requirements, side by side

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: OstfrontChivalry: Medieval Warfare
Minimum GPUGTX 1070 / RX 5600
Minimum CPU
Minimum RAM16 GB
Install size80 GB

Can your PC run them? Check each against your own kit: Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront · Chivalry: Medieval Warfare.

Accessibility features

Steam store pages declare 7 accessibility features for Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront and 1 for Chivalry: Medieval Warfare. A declaration is a floor, not a review.

If you like one, also try

Common questions

How different are Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront and Chivalry: Medieval Warfare in scope?

Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront has drawn 33,894 Steam reviews, ships 7 add-ons and installs in 80 GB. Chivalry: Medieval Warfare has drawn 65,058 Steam reviews and ships 2 add-ons.

Is Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront or Chivalry: Medieval Warfare better?

By the GamingPickz Score, Chivalry: Medieval Warfare rates higher (7.6 to 7.5). That is a composite of player sentiment, the critic aggregate and popularity, not our taste. "Better" also depends on price, length and platform, which the table above lays out.

Which is cheaper, Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront or Chivalry: Medieval Warfare?

Chivalry: Medieval Warfare is cheaper right now at $24.99, against $34.99. Prices move, so this is read live from Steam and can change.

Should I get Call to Arms - Gates of Hell: Ostfront or Chivalry: Medieval Warfare?

Chivalry: Medieval Warfare rates higher, 7.6 to 7.5 on the GamingPickz Score, and Chivalry: Medieval Warfare is the cheaper at $24.99. It also depends on what you want: the "which to pick" section above calls out which is cheaper, lighter on storage, better on a Steam Deck and the safer bet by weight of reviews.

Do you rank one above the other for a fee?

No. Neither game, nor anyone else, pays for placement or a verdict here. The order and every figure come out of the same public data the rest of the site uses.

How we compare, and what we will not do

The GamingPickz Score is a composite of player sentiment (adjusted for sample size), the critic aggregate and popularity, computed by the same code every ranked list on this site uses. The Steam rating label is Valve's own, reconstructed from the positive percentage and review count. Prices are read live. We do not write an opinion of which game is "better": we report the numbers and say which wins each measurable question above.

More on each