Originally Posted by Krikkit I don't. There's nothing more irritating when you're reinstalling a game than an install-story that won't shut up.
SOF1 and 2, I'm looking at you. Same with Operation Flashpoint. :\
it would be nice if you could press a button to shut it up, but it is very nice the first time you install ;)
BTW - I'm a huge C&C fan, and Ive played all the games, and they are fantastic fun, even renegade these days isn't that bad when you get into some real team play (instead of a bunch of n00bs together)
Although, id definitely admit renegade is the worst in the series, followed by generals
Fantastic they went back to their roots, i was so pissed when EA bought Westwood studios, and then ofc proceeded to ruin the C&C game
Personally i hate sup comm, but i really like the C&C3 demo, i think if you don't like sup comm, you will like C&C3, and if you like Sup comm you wont like C&C3 (not universal truth, but for the majority)
The epic scale of Supp comm is very nice, but the game itself sucks IMO, now if they made C&C meets Sup comm - /drool
Cant wait the 2 weeks its going to take this to come out :'( (reminds me of south park when cartman is waiting for the wii :p)
First of all, starcraft is not just a game. Its almost 11 years old and it still has an enourmous online and international professional following, mainly in south korea. One of the best, if not THE best rts ever. Where the C&C series and the warcraft series are still popular, they have had multiple remakes and renditions over the years, where starcraft never released a series beyond the expansion. How can it be said that starcraft is just a game when it saw said that C&C was played over and over jsut for that high score. The level of tactics and strategy that goes into starcraft cannot even THINK to be rivaled by the C&C series.
I hav heard good things about supcom but have not yet had the chane to play it myself. I have played all of the C&Cs religiously, and the formula above that the counter of c&c is supcom seems a little wrong. I personally look forward to supcom as the current best of the industry, but i cant pass judgement yet i suppose.
As to the SupCom bashers, it seems that the fanboyishness is kicking in quietly. all of the devout c&cs seem to dislike SupCom and talking smack of it. SupCom is doing something that no game has none before, namely raising the scale to almost realistic proportions and insane detail and realism. Again, have not played it but im going off our very own review and all of the trailers. C&C is remaking a game, the same series that started all that time ago. I think that theres a niche for SupCom, and i also think thats its rather stpid to ignore this chance in exchange for blind devotion to C&C.
Total anihalation was the perfect counter to the C&C back in the day. does history repeat itself ?:D
Originally Posted by Damouse As to the SupCom bashers, it seems that the fanboyishness is kicking in quietly. all of the devout c&cs seem to dislike SupCom and talking smack of it. SupCom is doing something that no game has none before, namely raising the scale to almost realistic proportions and insane detail and realism. Again, have not played it but im going off our very own review and all of the trailers. C&C is remaking a game, the same series that started all that time ago. I think that theres a niche for SupCom, and i also think thats its rather stpid to ignore this chance in exchange for blind devotion to C&C.
Total anihalation was the perfect counter to the C&C back in the day. does history repeat itself ?:D
Well to be fair, some games just don't appeal to some people
To a lot of people, i bet sup comm doesn't appeal, to me its just far to slow i guess, i don't know how to describe it, i know it doesn't appeal to me, i'm not saying its a bad game, I'm just saying i don't like it
Oh and to be fair, if your complaining of C&C3 being a remake of C&C - sup comm is pretty much a remake of TA - with better graphics and some new stuff
But isn't that what C&C3 is to C&C
Iv never played Starcraft but il take it on reputation alone that is an amazing game.
That out the way, onto Warcraft 3: The frozen Throne
This is possibly the single greatest RTS game iv ever played in my life. I have yet to come across any game that can beat this. This is in all aspects, the TRUE definition of Real-time-Strategy.
Why you ask? what makes it so good?
Well it actually has you make instant decisions depending on circumstances that mean every second counts. It has a game engine and playability thats simply spot-on and works. For every unit you make - There are numerous viable counters but they in turn have viable counters. The game is never about simply who has the bigger army - It comes down to pure micro-management of your units and the ability to macromanage your economy effectively.
Iv seen how the game has developed from the day it was released and iv never witnessed any other gaming community like it that constantly strives forward in excellence in the way the game is played. Over the years the strategys developed and so did players to become better and better until they reach levels that show show theres almost no way to improve further....but there always is! Be they little things or big things, theres always another strategy thats around the corner for it the revolutionises the way the game is played.
I myself stopped playing it over a year ago but iv never seen or played a game thats come close.
Originally Posted by randosome Well to be fair, some games just don't appeal to some people
To a lot of people, i bet sup comm doesn't appeal, to me its just far to slow i guess, i don't know how to describe it, i know it doesn't appeal to me, i'm not saying its a bad game, I'm just saying i don't like it
Oh and to be fair, if your complaining of C&C3 being a remake of C&C - sup comm is pretty much a remake of TA - with better graphics and some new stuff
But isn't that what C&C3 is to C&C
But c&c isnt revolutionary this time around it has the same enigne as generals. Where as Supcom is trully unique so far, any way good point from Damouse someone needed to say that.
Anyone else played as Nod yet? I love their base defences (3 for the price of one :D) but the AI never makes good use of that in skirmish mode, even on brutal. However their vehicles seemed lacking to me with none of the fun of the GDI tank rushes; they don't seem to have any punch. Their infantry isn't as good as GDI either and I found it hard to get a damage output that could be effective in the large battles. I loved Nod in the original but I'm really not feeling it here.
If you don't know how to play as Nod:
Select Nod from the drop down menu, it won't do anything but is still needed. Then press ctrl+alt+n. You can do the same to turn your opponent to GDI. I tried Skrin but of course that didn't work :p
I like SupCom. I was a total TA fan :) (good ol days) but I like the C&C series as well (played all of them) I see all these people complaining, but you can't compare these two games they are both different type of games in the RTS genre.
But ontopic: I'm definatly going to buy C&C:TW... looks really great, and I like the music in the C&C series :)
You know what, I don't care about any of the hype or arguements.
It's Command & Conquer, therefore, I'll buy it, play it to death, then place it on my shelf next to all the other C&C Games, my copies of TA & SupCom and other games I've played to death. (EDIT: I've not played SupCom to death just yet, but it'll get there eventually!)
But, I'm only buying it because it is Command & Conquer. Nothing can change my mind on that. Just ask the Missus!! :)
Originally Posted by Paradigm Shifter ...
Sorry... I'm such a C&C geek it isn't even funny. :)
I found it funny :p
Personally I can't stand most RTS games but even I can see that SupCom and C&C are quite different and people's preferences will depend highly on their preferred style of game-play. It's like gaming mice: your favourite mouse is likely not the same as the one I prefer and is definitely not the best one for everyone.
I played as NOD using a 'altered' config file, didn't know it was as simple as ctrl+alt+n!!
They have some very cool units, flame tanks being my all-time favourite, and a nice twist on base defences.
I was very disappointed with the SupCom from the demo, ran like a dog on my gaming rig. Im a big TA fan, and still play it regularly, but i guess i'll have to wait till i upgrade again to get the most from SupCom.
Until then, i was impressed by C&C3, some nice new twists and some nice old references to the original game (check the NOD laster tower sound effect). Not quite to the Company of Heroes level of greatness, but worth a punt for 30 quid surely.
Originally Posted by MiNiMaL_FuSS not a fan of Supreme Commander, really miss C&C games....bring back the Grand Cannon....that was a gun n a half.
Gunna go dig out RA2 now me thinks.
ha ha that gun rocked :p although the prism towers were clearly better in big enough groups, plus their ROF was much better and the grand cannon had a minimum range too, so if you got close enough it was useless
The thing for me about C&C is that I get a game, and then after a few weeks I get bored of it, never touch it again and lose the box. When a new version comes out I have developed that hunger again and I enjoy playing it again. I havnt played C&C for years so I am looking forward to this one. Although I suspect I will get bored of it again soon enough.
I am mroe put off by multiplayer, when I go online against some "leet" player. they play the boring route and go after me in the first 4 minutes rather than build up a force. I prefer to play the game in multiplayer how it should be played. Send a scouting party, size up their base, send a few attacks to check their strength ect. A proper war.
I'm not quite sure what to say to all the comments presented here, there are some good, some bad, and some completely ridiculous to be frank, not least from bit-tech staff, no offense lads but you really do seem to be dropping the ball quite a bit lately. Dont mean to offend you with that but you really do need to take a step back and look at your reviews and previews and see if you can improve them, there's been a definite down turn lately, and i just wish it wasnt so.
C&C and the TA series stand on their own out from the crowd in many different ways, i find it quite funny that people mention starcraft as the spawn of satan almost aswell. All three have a lot of good memories for me, outwitting the tech staff at my old secondary school at the begining of each term and hiding C&C so we could all play for example, or TA, which was KaosLAN's game of choice for competition RTS, and even Starcraft for it's addictive gameplay. There is a difference between all three, in their style, their progressions, and in their followings. TA has stayed on my hard drive for years, and i've always had at least one C&C game installed, starcraft i'm afraid wained for me under newer games, but the gameplay itself has remained an inspiration in many game developers titles, as C&C was to starcrafts developers. It's almost as if people have forgotten the evolution of these games, to use a pun, heres the bread, yes but what about the wheat ?
I liked someones point about renegade, i have no shame in saying that when i took my copy to a LAN once, and having the only copy, within an hour everyone was playing it, and i've never figured out whether it was because it was C&C or whether it was the gameplay itself, not sure i ever will. All i know is that C&C has an almost inefible quality to it, no matter which in the series your talking about, as do TA, starcraft, Dawn of War even, the titles that are able to create that feeling around them are very special. I'm not sure if it was'nt for TA i would feel that way about Supreme Commander though, obviously without TA, SC would'nt exist, but lets presume for a minute TA never existed, would SC be as popular ? I really dont think so myself, i could be way off there but i just dont see it being anywhere near as popular as it is now without TA, it's something worth remembering i think.
Personally i think C&C3's going to be amazing, apply the same argument to it that i just have to TA and SC, what if the first C&C never existed, would the new one really be as amazing ? I find myself saying yes for many of the reasons mentioned by others, the gameplay, the FMV, the whole storyline feel and the competition style multiplayer.
I love both, and as someone else has said i'll be playing both for a long LONG time to come. But i also wish people would'nt judge games on their forebears and prequels in the way that they do, enjoy it for what it is, and not the whole series, and thats a note for the reviewers as much as the readers. And if you need more proof of what i'm saying, you need look no further than the star trek franchise, and make your minds up for yourselves :). Rant over.
I also have to pipe in and say that comparing SupCom with CnC3 really makes no sense. They are completely different games. SupCom would be waaay more difficult to play without the mega zoom. CnC never has required any feature like that, and I really don't see a need for it because the game is on such a smaller scale.
CnC fans are a lot like Evil Dead fans. Someone might watch Evil Dead 2 or Army of Darkness and think "this movie is frickin stupid." To a follower though, someone who appreciates it, they love em.
Supreme Commander, although pretty cool and interesting, grew old on me fast. All 3 sides are almost identical. The only differences are the upgrades you can buy for your ACU (which are almost identical) and the T3 and experimental units. CnC has always been about the strong plot driven gameplay, the wacky characters and cutscenes (Seth getting his noggin popped in CnC1) and the fast, simplistic gameplay. CnC3 definitely seems to be catered to the old school fans, and if you weren't an old school fan, you probably will not like CnC3. If you're into the complicated, long, drawn out battles of SupCom you probably won't like CnC3.
The review mentions how CnC needs a change to the gameplay mechanics, to be modernized to be more like other RTS games, and it instantly reminded me of CnC Generals. Most of the CnC community considered Generals a slap in the face, a massive deviation of what made CnC "CnC." Not a bad game on its own, but definitely not deserving of the CnC title. It sounds ridiculous, but its easier to think of CnC of being in a genre of its own, rather than comparing it to the likes of SupCom or StarCraft, etc.
Im not so sure about ur theories. Ill have to think them over in a looong bath with my rubber duckies....
Anyway, back to sanityville, from first shot it seems i have to disagree. The first old school C&C that comes to mind is red alert of course. The strategy was shoddy and the micromanagement mediocre at best. TA was not overly an improvement, but at the time the games were fantastic.
Now you take that and you say that Warcraft and Starcraft would not have existed, where starcraft has not undergone anything more drastic then a new coat of paint and the original warcraft is still played, and thats where id have to question ur whole rant ( :) ). The gap between the two is a little big to bridge so easily id say. You can say that Halo pushed the modern shooter forward but i dont think you can say that without halo there would BE no good FPS right now (apologize for the referance).
I just cant wait for Starcraft 2; was hinted at recently. Blizzard has had 11 years to study the effects of the first starcraft, it will be interesting to see what they come up with.
Originally Posted by Damouse I just cant wait for Starcraft 2; was hinted at recently. Blizzard has had 11 years to study the effects of the first starcraft, it will be interesting to see what they come up with.
You don't know Red Alert 2 unless you've played it with the DeeZire mod. It's like an unofficial expansion, but more awesome than most expansions. Also, you need Yuri's revenge for it to work on XP or higher.
Originally Posted by Cobalt Anyone else played as Nod yet? I love their base defences (3 for the price of one :D) but the AI never makes good use of that in skirmish mode, even on brutal. However their vehicles seemed lacking to me with none of the fun of the GDI tank rushes; they don't seem to have any punch. Their infantry isn't as good as GDI either and I found it hard to get a damage output that could be effective in the large battles. I loved Nod in the original but I'm really not feeling it here.
If you don't know how to play as Nod:
Select Nod from the drop down menu, it won't do anything but is still needed. Then press ctrl+alt+n. You can do the same to turn your opponent to GDI. I tried Skrin but of course that didn't work :p
couple of those obliesk of light things + about 10 beam cannons charging each obliesk up and you ant go wrong. re-charge time decreases, damage increases, and i think range does too.
and all you need to do to play Nod, is press and hold N then click on Nod. thats it none of this ctrl + alt business. i think you can also use it to chose they type of game play the AI will use. balanced i presume with be equal doses of troops, tanks and aircraft coming at you in a timely fashion, but you can pick rush for a fast enemy or turtle who will just amass forces and wait.
people comparing SupCom and CnC3 are doing the apples to oranges. its going to happen though since they are both RTS but SupCom has a different appeal
for those who like masterminding massive wars on a huge scale, with lots of units and having to really come up with good war-like strategies i guess SupCom is your game.
if you need a quick fix from a nice smaller scale, more focus'd battle then CnC3 is for you. thats really the difference i think SupCom is is real time war, CnC3 is real time battle.
Perhaps i am being a little Damouse, but i've sat and watched things roll slowly down the hill around bit-tech for quite a while now, year or so i'd say, this is the first time i've said anything. The only two sites i rely on and check daily are bit-tech and hardocp as their standards have always been top notch with a slightly different approach to their testing which is useful. Now i find one slipping below the other, it just worries me a little thats all, felt it was time to say a word or two, dont mean to step on anyones toes.
And your right about the starcraft comparison, it's a difficult one because of the time between C&C and warcraft/starcraft but i still think the reasoning holds true. There are some games out there that simply would'nt have happened if it was'nt for the inspiration derived directly from the first C&C, be it in concept or in gameplay. And i'm afraid Halo is a flawed comparison for the FPS genre, Halo is a very fan based game, to console gamers its like the holy grail, but to PC gamers its more "well whats all the fuss about?". We'd been playing better quality FPS's for a very long time when halo arrived, and were left waiting for a year before a PC port arrived, like i said its a very console fan game. As to Halos line of development, it again is another game that would'nt have happened without a numerous number of PC FPS titles going before it.
Must admit though i'm looking forward to seeing how Halo Wars turns out, it could be amazing, or it could be another mediocre gameplay experience, found Halo2 quite dull apart from the graphics, gameplay was sorely lacking as with the first Halo. Halo Wars will have to compete with ET:Quake Wars and the new Team Fortress plus current titles already out on PC, the sceptic in me says it will turn into another console fan title but i'd like to see it do better than that this time around. They've had the time to get it right, and frankly if they dont and the gameplay remains somewhat clumsy as with the other Halos i dont see it working for PC gamers, once again. Makes me a bit sad really cause Halo like C&C is one of those games where the storyline and cutscenes are actually very good, but where it is'nt like C&C is that its gameplay lets it down, at least to me anyway.
But i suppose coming from Planetside almost any big battle FPS will let me down, it's a curse hehe :). Some wonderful big battle FPS titles out there, most of which i own, but for me the benchmark in gameplay will always be the battlefield series and planetside, and UT and Quake for the more compact and/or fast paced action i sometimes desire. Quake Wars and the new UT is going to be really interesting, cant wait to see how it turns out, shaping up to be a great year for hardware and games overall :).
EDIT: Oh and Damouse that case design of yours is sick mate! Cant wait to see to see what it looks like when it's done, loving it :).
Comments 26 to 50 of 60
ReplyBTW - I'm a huge C&C fan, and Ive played all the games, and they are fantastic fun, even renegade these days isn't that bad when you get into some real team play (instead of a bunch of n00bs together)
Although, id definitely admit renegade is the worst in the series, followed by generals
Fantastic they went back to their roots, i was so pissed when EA bought Westwood studios, and then ofc proceeded to ruin the C&C game
Personally i hate sup comm, but i really like the C&C3 demo, i think if you don't like sup comm, you will like C&C3, and if you like Sup comm you wont like C&C3 (not universal truth, but for the majority)
The epic scale of Supp comm is very nice, but the game itself sucks IMO, now if they made C&C meets Sup comm - /drool
Cant wait the 2 weeks its going to take this to come out :'( (reminds me of south park when cartman is waiting for the wii :p)
First of all, starcraft is not just a game. Its almost 11 years old and it still has an enourmous online and international professional following, mainly in south korea. One of the best, if not THE best rts ever. Where the C&C series and the warcraft series are still popular, they have had multiple remakes and renditions over the years, where starcraft never released a series beyond the expansion. How can it be said that starcraft is just a game when it saw said that C&C was played over and over jsut for that high score. The level of tactics and strategy that goes into starcraft cannot even THINK to be rivaled by the C&C series.
I hav heard good things about supcom but have not yet had the chane to play it myself. I have played all of the C&Cs religiously, and the formula above that the counter of c&c is supcom seems a little wrong. I personally look forward to supcom as the current best of the industry, but i cant pass judgement yet i suppose.
As to the SupCom bashers, it seems that the fanboyishness is kicking in quietly. all of the devout c&cs seem to dislike SupCom and talking smack of it. SupCom is doing something that no game has none before, namely raising the scale to almost realistic proportions and insane detail and realism. Again, have not played it but im going off our very own review and all of the trailers. C&C is remaking a game, the same series that started all that time ago. I think that theres a niche for SupCom, and i also think thats its rather stpid to ignore this chance in exchange for blind devotion to C&C.
Total anihalation was the perfect counter to the C&C back in the day. does history repeat itself ?:D
To a lot of people, i bet sup comm doesn't appeal, to me its just far to slow i guess, i don't know how to describe it, i know it doesn't appeal to me, i'm not saying its a bad game, I'm just saying i don't like it
Oh and to be fair, if your complaining of C&C3 being a remake of C&C - sup comm is pretty much a remake of TA - with better graphics and some new stuff
But isn't that what C&C3 is to C&C
That out the way, onto Warcraft 3: The frozen Throne
This is possibly the single greatest RTS game iv ever played in my life. I have yet to come across any game that can beat this. This is in all aspects, the TRUE definition of Real-time-Strategy.
Why you ask? what makes it so good?
Well it actually has you make instant decisions depending on circumstances that mean every second counts. It has a game engine and playability thats simply spot-on and works. For every unit you make - There are numerous viable counters but they in turn have viable counters. The game is never about simply who has the bigger army - It comes down to pure micro-management of your units and the ability to macromanage your economy effectively.
Iv seen how the game has developed from the day it was released and iv never witnessed any other gaming community like it that constantly strives forward in excellence in the way the game is played. Over the years the strategys developed and so did players to become better and better until they reach levels that show show theres almost no way to improve further....but there always is! Be they little things or big things, theres always another strategy thats around the corner for it the revolutionises the way the game is played.
I myself stopped playing it over a year ago but iv never seen or played a game thats come close.
But c&c isnt revolutionary this time around it has the same enigne as generals. Where as Supcom is trully unique so far, any way good point from Damouse someone needed to say that.
If you don't know how to play as Nod:
Select Nod from the drop down menu, it won't do anything but is still needed. Then press ctrl+alt+n. You can do the same to turn your opponent to GDI. I tried Skrin but of course that didn't work :p
But ontopic: I'm definatly going to buy C&C:TW... looks really great, and I like the music in the C&C series :)
It's Command & Conquer, therefore, I'll buy it, play it to death, then place it on my shelf next to all the other C&C Games, my copies of TA & SupCom and other games I've played to death. (EDIT: I've not played SupCom to death just yet, but it'll get there eventually!)
But, I'm only buying it because it is Command & Conquer. Nothing can change my mind on that. Just ask the Missus!! :)
Personally I can't stand most RTS games but even I can see that SupCom and C&C are quite different and people's preferences will depend highly on their preferred style of game-play. It's like gaming mice: your favourite mouse is likely not the same as the one I prefer and is definitely not the best one for everyone.
They have some very cool units, flame tanks being my all-time favourite, and a nice twist on base defences.
I was very disappointed with the SupCom from the demo, ran like a dog on my gaming rig. Im a big TA fan, and still play it regularly, but i guess i'll have to wait till i upgrade again to get the most from SupCom.
Until then, i was impressed by C&C3, some nice new twists and some nice old references to the original game (check the NOD laster tower sound effect). Not quite to the Company of Heroes level of greatness, but worth a punt for 30 quid surely.
Gunna go dig out RA2 now me thinks.
I am mroe put off by multiplayer, when I go online against some "leet" player. they play the boring route and go after me in the first 4 minutes rather than build up a force. I prefer to play the game in multiplayer how it should be played. Send a scouting party, size up their base, send a few attacks to check their strength ect. A proper war.
You can trust the players your playing with, and its usually faster than public servers.
C&C and the TA series stand on their own out from the crowd in many different ways, i find it quite funny that people mention starcraft as the spawn of satan almost aswell. All three have a lot of good memories for me, outwitting the tech staff at my old secondary school at the begining of each term and hiding C&C so we could all play for example, or TA, which was KaosLAN's game of choice for competition RTS, and even Starcraft for it's addictive gameplay. There is a difference between all three, in their style, their progressions, and in their followings. TA has stayed on my hard drive for years, and i've always had at least one C&C game installed, starcraft i'm afraid wained for me under newer games, but the gameplay itself has remained an inspiration in many game developers titles, as C&C was to starcrafts developers. It's almost as if people have forgotten the evolution of these games, to use a pun, heres the bread, yes but what about the wheat ?
I liked someones point about renegade, i have no shame in saying that when i took my copy to a LAN once, and having the only copy, within an hour everyone was playing it, and i've never figured out whether it was because it was C&C or whether it was the gameplay itself, not sure i ever will. All i know is that C&C has an almost inefible quality to it, no matter which in the series your talking about, as do TA, starcraft, Dawn of War even, the titles that are able to create that feeling around them are very special. I'm not sure if it was'nt for TA i would feel that way about Supreme Commander though, obviously without TA, SC would'nt exist, but lets presume for a minute TA never existed, would SC be as popular ? I really dont think so myself, i could be way off there but i just dont see it being anywhere near as popular as it is now without TA, it's something worth remembering i think.
Personally i think C&C3's going to be amazing, apply the same argument to it that i just have to TA and SC, what if the first C&C never existed, would the new one really be as amazing ? I find myself saying yes for many of the reasons mentioned by others, the gameplay, the FMV, the whole storyline feel and the competition style multiplayer.
I love both, and as someone else has said i'll be playing both for a long LONG time to come. But i also wish people would'nt judge games on their forebears and prequels in the way that they do, enjoy it for what it is, and not the whole series, and thats a note for the reviewers as much as the readers. And if you need more proof of what i'm saying, you need look no further than the star trek franchise, and make your minds up for yourselves :). Rant over.
CnC fans are a lot like Evil Dead fans. Someone might watch Evil Dead 2 or Army of Darkness and think "this movie is frickin stupid." To a follower though, someone who appreciates it, they love em.
Supreme Commander, although pretty cool and interesting, grew old on me fast. All 3 sides are almost identical. The only differences are the upgrades you can buy for your ACU (which are almost identical) and the T3 and experimental units. CnC has always been about the strong plot driven gameplay, the wacky characters and cutscenes (Seth getting his noggin popped in CnC1) and the fast, simplistic gameplay. CnC3 definitely seems to be catered to the old school fans, and if you weren't an old school fan, you probably will not like CnC3. If you're into the complicated, long, drawn out battles of SupCom you probably won't like CnC3.
The review mentions how CnC needs a change to the gameplay mechanics, to be modernized to be more like other RTS games, and it instantly reminded me of CnC Generals. Most of the CnC community considered Generals a slap in the face, a massive deviation of what made CnC "CnC." Not a bad game on its own, but definitely not deserving of the CnC title. It sounds ridiculous, but its easier to think of CnC of being in a genre of its own, rather than comparing it to the likes of SupCom or StarCraft, etc.
Darn buck, that was pretty cold.
Im not so sure about ur theories. Ill have to think them over in a looong bath with my rubber duckies....
Anyway, back to sanityville, from first shot it seems i have to disagree. The first old school C&C that comes to mind is red alert of course. The strategy was shoddy and the micromanagement mediocre at best. TA was not overly an improvement, but at the time the games were fantastic.
Now you take that and you say that Warcraft and Starcraft would not have existed, where starcraft has not undergone anything more drastic then a new coat of paint and the original warcraft is still played, and thats where id have to question ur whole rant ( :) ). The gap between the two is a little big to bridge so easily id say. You can say that Halo pushed the modern shooter forward but i dont think you can say that without halo there would BE no good FPS right now (apologize for the referance).
I just cant wait for Starcraft 2; was hinted at recently. Blizzard has had 11 years to study the effects of the first starcraft, it will be interesting to see what they come up with.
Where?! Where?!
Ahh, what's more sad I've play lists which start with that... only thing I can add is.
Welcome back Commander.
couple of those obliesk of light things + about 10 beam cannons charging each obliesk up and you ant go wrong. re-charge time decreases, damage increases, and i think range does too.
and all you need to do to play Nod, is press and hold N then click on Nod. thats it none of this ctrl + alt business. i think you can also use it to chose they type of game play the AI will use. balanced i presume with be equal doses of troops, tanks and aircraft coming at you in a timely fashion, but you can pick rush for a fast enemy or turtle who will just amass forces and wait.
people comparing SupCom and CnC3 are doing the apples to oranges. its going to happen though since they are both RTS but SupCom has a different appeal
for those who like masterminding massive wars on a huge scale, with lots of units and having to really come up with good war-like strategies i guess SupCom is your game.
if you need a quick fix from a nice smaller scale, more focus'd battle then CnC3 is for you. thats really the difference i think SupCom is is real time war, CnC3 is real time battle.
And your right about the starcraft comparison, it's a difficult one because of the time between C&C and warcraft/starcraft but i still think the reasoning holds true. There are some games out there that simply would'nt have happened if it was'nt for the inspiration derived directly from the first C&C, be it in concept or in gameplay. And i'm afraid Halo is a flawed comparison for the FPS genre, Halo is a very fan based game, to console gamers its like the holy grail, but to PC gamers its more "well whats all the fuss about?". We'd been playing better quality FPS's for a very long time when halo arrived, and were left waiting for a year before a PC port arrived, like i said its a very console fan game. As to Halos line of development, it again is another game that would'nt have happened without a numerous number of PC FPS titles going before it.
Must admit though i'm looking forward to seeing how Halo Wars turns out, it could be amazing, or it could be another mediocre gameplay experience, found Halo2 quite dull apart from the graphics, gameplay was sorely lacking as with the first Halo. Halo Wars will have to compete with ET:Quake Wars and the new Team Fortress plus current titles already out on PC, the sceptic in me says it will turn into another console fan title but i'd like to see it do better than that this time around. They've had the time to get it right, and frankly if they dont and the gameplay remains somewhat clumsy as with the other Halos i dont see it working for PC gamers, once again. Makes me a bit sad really cause Halo like C&C is one of those games where the storyline and cutscenes are actually very good, but where it is'nt like C&C is that its gameplay lets it down, at least to me anyway.
But i suppose coming from Planetside almost any big battle FPS will let me down, it's a curse hehe :). Some wonderful big battle FPS titles out there, most of which i own, but for me the benchmark in gameplay will always be the battlefield series and planetside, and UT and Quake for the more compact and/or fast paced action i sometimes desire. Quake Wars and the new UT is going to be really interesting, cant wait to see how it turns out, shaping up to be a great year for hardware and games overall :).
EDIT: Oh and Damouse that case design of yours is sick mate! Cant wait to see to see what it looks like when it's done, loving it :).
-
« Previous
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
Next »
Discuss in the forums