| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #397902 is a reply to message #397788] |
Fri, 14 August 2009 04:02   |
 |
Dover
Messages: 2547
Registered: March 2006
Location: Monterey, California
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| NukeIt15 wrote on Wed, 12 August 2009 21:45 |
Until somebody gives me terrain deformation again, it's still all a step backwards from TS. That one feature alone added a depth that simply doesn't exist in the newer games- to say nothing of the other environmental hazards. Forget all the pre-release bullshit promises for one second and the game still has more depth than the entire rest of the series- combine the environments and dynamic terrain from TS with newer features like garrisoning and you'd have a real winner.
If, that is, you didn't ruin it all by putting in too many and too powerful superweapons and epic units, too few defensive units, structures, and abilities, combined with obscenely fast build rates and weak-as-paper structure armor. Which EA would.
|
Too few defensive units/structures? Hah. I bet you were one of the people who bitched on and on about the Scrin air units out-ranging your air defense, huh? Fast build rates? Welcome to 2009, we've come a far way from WarCraft 1. Superweapons keep the game from becoming a macro-fest of "Who can produce the most Medium Tanks?", and epic units open up new strategies (Like dropping a mothership on the enemy base). Options are invariably good.
And for that matter, Terrain deformation didn't do anything for the game besides piss me the fuck off. Whatever you might think, that one feature didn't give the game any depth at all, and any attempt to bring realism to Tiberian Sun is a lost cause.
In short, L2RTS.
| DarkDemin wrote on Thu, 03 August 2006 19:19 |
Remember kids the internet is serious business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #398453 is a reply to message #394552] |
Tue, 18 August 2009 17:08 |
 |
NukeIt15
Messages: 987
Registered: February 2003
Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| Quote: |
Options are invariably good.
|
Bingo. Which means that if I'd like the option of turtling, there should be a viable way of doing that which won't ruin me economically because there's a unit which can clear multiple towers simultaneously if they so happen to be closely placed enough to create the interlocking fields of fire which are necessary to make said static defenses effective. Yes, said unit is weakly armored and is eaten alive by aircraft, but unless you catch it before it opens fire you'll still be out a few thousand credits... which defeats the purpose of having a static defense that can stand up on its own until backup arrives. Compare this to earlier artillery units which, while powerful, required numbers and support to be a real threat. You've really gotta try to make any offensive unit not at least pay for itself, whereas most defensive units and structures never get a chance to pay themselves off in enemies destroyed. Useless structures do not present strategic options, they present a resource sink (in power use and credits) that contributes nothing to base security. That's a cake or death decision, much like throwing basic infantry into the teeth of heavy anti-infantry units or using missile troopers instead.
And, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, walls. If options are invariably good, why remove the option of creating a basic passive defense to slow down and impede attacks? Yes, I'm aware they were poorly coded and couldn't be properly implemented by release. That's what patches are for.
L2RTS is an exceedingly stupid sentiment considering that the present generation of RTS games has grown out of a single play style in older titles. Which is to say that there are fewer options for a player of a modern RTS title than there are for players of older titles. That the lost tactics, strategies, and abilities were not the most popular choices is utterly irrelevant, because...
| Quote: |
Options are invariably good.
|
QED.
And for the record, I don't even play these games online; I haven't played an RTS against a stranger in years. Just in case you wanted to keep pushing the "well you must be pissed that you keep getting your ass whooped" angle. Because we all know that you can only be right if you've got a good ladder ranking.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #398455 is a reply to message #394552] |
Tue, 18 August 2009 17:29 |
 |
GEORGE ZIMMER
Messages: 2605
Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
I agree with NukeIt here.
It's not as though C&C3 was anything more than a tank spam fest, too, y'know. If anything it had LESS strategic options, thanks to the shitfest of multi-role units and units that cost less and dealt more damage. Defense was practically removed, it all came down to who had a better economy and could pump out more units.
Sure, superweapons helped, but in the end you'd be killing them before it even goes off.
TS may have had a few annoying features, but they were still features and options. You had less turtling, but defenses still helped (Except for AA, which were practically useless).
It's very possible to keep a lively and strategic game without it being C&C3. And C&C4 seems to set out to do that. What harm would there be in adding more tactical depth and features?
Toggle Spoiler| Scrin wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 13:22 |
| cAmpa wrote on Sat, 24 January 2009 12:45 |
Scrin, stop pming people to get the building bars.
|
FUCK YOU AND THIS SHIT GAME WITH YOUR SCRIPTS!!! I HAVE ASKING YOU AND ANOTHER NOOBS HERE ABOUT HELP WITH THAT BUILDING ICONS FEATURES FOR YEARS, BUT YOU KEEP IGNORING ME AND KEEP WRITE SHIT, SO BURN YOU AND YOUR ASSLICKERS FRIENDS, THIS TIME I'M NOT COME BACK!!!!!!!!!   
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: C&C 4 Coming!!!! [message #398722 is a reply to message #394552] |
Thu, 20 August 2009 17:47 |
 |
infusi0n
Messages: 53
Registered: October 2008
Location: New York
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
|
I'll be buying C&C4 even tho I don't like RTS games. It is atleast C&C in the proper universe (tiberium) and everyone should do the same atleast to just show support for the C&C brand. Enough sales= FPS game?
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
