|
|
| Re: Let's talk about C&C3 [message #232637 is a reply to message #232203] |
Fri, 01 December 2006 13:09   |
icedog90
Messages: 3483
Registered: April 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
|
Speaking of beta, there is an open multiplayer beta for Supreme Commander that is out right now (it's an RTS that is being made by the same people who did Total Annihilation, with the same project leader too). I only needed to play it for 10 minutes to figure out how freaking awesome it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Let's talk about C&C3 [message #232676 is a reply to message #232675] |
Fri, 01 December 2006 18:22 |
 |
bigejoe14
Messages: 1302
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| help-linux wrote on Fri, 01 December 2006 18:10 |
i dont see what is wrong with Generals? can someone enlighten me?
|
GRRR NO NOD OR GDI EA MAKE GAME AND USE CNC NAME ONLY FOR MONEY EA RAWR!
As an RTS game in itself, there was nothing really wrong with it. It was pretty solid and fun to play. The complaints come from the fact that it retained nothing from the previous C&C games, throwing out most of what made C&C recognizable and replacing it with generic RTS formulas that have been done to death.
WHATEVER, FAGGOT
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Let's talk about C&C3 [message #232680 is a reply to message #232203] |
Fri, 01 December 2006 18:48 |
fl00d3d
Messages: 1107
Registered: August 2003
Location: Iowa, USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star)
Viva la Resistance! |
|
|
|
I think EA was just trying to guarantee a successful product by leeching the C&C name. They knew it had absolutely nothing to do with the old C&C story lines, but thats what people were familiar with. Generals is a great game (and probably would have been even better if Westwood had made it), and Zero Hour is not bad either. Generals is very balanced in my opinion - and zero hour is somewhat balanced (easier to abuse the misbalances). C&C3 promises to be a great game and I definitely plan on buying it. I have purchased, played, defeated, and mastered every C&C game ever made and EA has just given me another one to tamper with. I truely hope it turns out to be a balanced RTS.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Let's talk about C&C3 [message #232690 is a reply to message #232678] |
Fri, 01 December 2006 21:13 |
|
bigejoe14
Messages: 1302
Registered: February 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| help-linux wrote on Fri, 01 December 2006 18:38 |
i wouldn't of though "Command and Conquer" would automaticly assume the game has "Nod" and "GDI" in it? You command units such as the "Quad Cannon" (i love this one) and you "Conquer" other players with them.
|
It just came as a shock to a lot of people when it was announced that it was going to be set in a modern warfare setting, as opposed to the Tiberian and Red Alert universes that we were used to from the past four games. And like I said, it didn't keep it from being a solid and fun RTS game, and the tasteless atmosphere the game had made it all the more fun for me.
WHATEVER, FAGGOT
|
|
|
|
| Re: Let's talk about C&C3 [message #232700 is a reply to message #232680] |
Sat, 02 December 2006 00:09 |
 |
terminator 101
Messages: 822
Registered: March 2003
Location: Toronto
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| fl00d3d wrote on Fri, 01 December 2006 20:48 |
Generals is very balanced in my opinion
|
In my opinion, it is not. Most of the time it is like this GLA>CHINA>USA>GLA
USA Examples:
Pathfinder/Ranger>(stealth)Rebel, stinger site,
Tomahawk>Buggy, Technical
China Examples:
Gattling Tank/Gattlink tower>All USA air units
MIG>pretty much any thing that USA has
GLA Examples:
Anthrax(shells)> Any chineese infantry
BombTruck can can easily get past all china defences(except for mines)
I can't think of any more examples because I have not played the game in some time, but it is basically like rock/paper/scissors
[Updated on: Sat, 02 December 2006 00:09] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Let's talk about C&C3 [message #232717 is a reply to message #232203] |
Sat, 02 December 2006 06:07 |
|
|
The problem I had with Generals is that the gameplay is more like Starcraft or Warcraft than any C&C game.
If C&C3 brings back the classic C&C gameplay, I will be happy.
Jonathan Wilson aka Jonwil
Creator and Lead Coder of the Custom scripts.dll
Renegade Engine Guru
Creator and Lead Coder of TT.DLL
Official member of Tiberian Technologies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Let's talk about C&C3 [message #232827 is a reply to message #232203] |
Sun, 03 December 2006 18:27 |
icedog90
Messages: 3483
Registered: April 2003
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
|
Ummmmmm... have you not seen the trailers that have Frank's music in them? It makes it kind of obvious that they are using his music still, and that hopefully they will try to do it themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Let's talk about C&C3 [message #232860 is a reply to message #232203] |
Sun, 03 December 2006 22:05 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7429
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
If I remember right, game makers don't generally post the requirements until the game is closer to completion.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Let's talk about C&C3 [message #232866 is a reply to message #232203] |
Sun, 03 December 2006 23:23 |
|
|
Start with the system requirements for BFME2 and increase them a little and you will get an idea of what C&C3 will require.
Jonathan Wilson aka Jonwil
Creator and Lead Coder of the Custom scripts.dll
Renegade Engine Guru
Creator and Lead Coder of TT.DLL
Official member of Tiberian Technologies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
