The Ur-Quan Masters Home Page Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 28, 2022, 12:50:12 pm
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Celebrating 30 years of Star Control 2 - The Ur-Quan Masters

+  The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum
|-+  The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release
| |-+  Starbase Café (Moderator: Death 999)
| | |-+  Command and Conquer 3
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: Command and Conquer 3  (Read 6010 times)
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1387



View Profile
Command and Conquer 3
« on: April 22, 2006, 07:17:16 am »

Yes! And this time it is no prank!

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/commandconquer3/index.html

I will be very disappointed if the "third race" is not the aliens.


So many great sequels on the horizon. This, a new Star Control, BF 2142 (is it just me does this look like an action version of the C&C sequels?), Halo 3. Throw in Spore and you've bought your way into the poor house.
Logged
Cronos
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 170


Shofixti Scoutmaster


View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #1 on: April 22, 2006, 10:26:47 am »

Tsk Tsk Tsk. Lest you forget about the wonder known as Bioshock
« Last Edit: April 22, 2006, 10:29:16 am by Cronos » Logged
TiLT
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 260


To boldly go where no Spathi has dared go before


View Profile WWW
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #2 on: April 22, 2006, 11:21:07 pm »

Keep in mind that Westwood is no more (except as a logo EA Games can stamp on their game boxes if they want to), and that EA has a VERY bad reputation (deservedly so). You'd be lucky if you don't get mission briefings in this game where the briefing officer is drinking Pepsi and eating Burger King burgers.
Logged
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1387



View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #3 on: April 23, 2006, 01:18:00 am »

Well, there was no pepsi or burgers at the end of Starflight.

I'm hoping that Westwood was able to get enough done on the design and plot fronts on this project, before they were dismantled.
Logged
Ivan Ivanov
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 296


Internet Piracy


View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #4 on: April 23, 2006, 11:09:49 am »

Well, there was no pepsi or burgers at the end of Starflight.

I'm hoping that Westwood was able to get enough done on the design and plot fronts on this project, before they were dismantled.

I wouldn't put much hopes in Westwood either.

They had a few good ideas at the beginning.
Dune 2 was quite revolutionary, and the first C&C game was nice. But after that they didn't make anything new. Every new game was the same old C&C with slightly updated graphics.
I admit I don't know if it's true for every C&C game as I gave up on the series somewhere around Tiberian Sun (or Emperor: Battlle for Dune if you count the Dune games).

I guess the biggest problem I have with those games is that the AI was so bloody stupid. The strategy  for every single one of those games was:
1) Build defences strong enough to hold off a few attacks
2) Find a way to exploit AI's stupidity, that  will allow you to win in every mission.
3) Repeat in every single mission

It gets boring after a while...
Logged

Your bruises are reminders of naivete and trust
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1387



View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #5 on: April 23, 2006, 03:18:13 pm »

Generals had improved balance and AI. The problem is it is the bastard of the series, so most fans probably didn't give it a chance (I almost didn't.) It is quite a slap in the face, when you're coming from fighting a dark, cryptic, evil force that is bringing about world destruction, with perhaps an even darker and more powerful. . .something beyond them. Now, all that is chuked and you're fighting a handful of retarded people wearing garbage cans and sporting the pinnacle of WWI technology (what can two world superpowers possibly do against such a menace!?)

But, from a gameplay standpoint, Generals seemed a nice step up, even if some don't like how you can build magic resource structures inside your base and be fully funded by those.

So, I'm not too worried about the gameplay, just the plot side of things.
Logged
Mugz the Sane
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 159


need coffee...


View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #6 on: July 27, 2006, 12:20:41 pm »

C&C was pretty good - all of them - if you went for the storyline. Kane, the tiberium, GDI et cetera. It could have been done a lot better though if they'd used a different game style instead of RTS. RPG might've worked better, or FPS. Ho hum.

the red alert series and generals both didn't quite do it for me - particularly generals - but that could just be personal taste.
And as for the dunes - played 'em all, read the books and watched the movies. Frank Herbert nut here, forgive me.
Logged

I'm seriously considering going to Bali to paint nude women.
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1387



View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #7 on: July 27, 2006, 05:59:57 pm »

Well there are already plenty of fully RPG games out there, and there are FPS C&C games, like Renegade or Battlefield 2142. Smiley

But what would be quite excellent, is a C&C game that was an Action/RTS combo like Battlezone 2. You command from god view, but whenever you like, you can select a unit and then take it over in a FPS/TPS style action mode. You can even lead your troops into battle this way (just have them follow you) and if your unit that you are directly controlling gets killed, you just go back to god mode and command from there or take control of another unit.

Ooow, driving a Mammoth into battle, if the very thought doesn't give you shivers, you might want to check your pulse. Cheesy
Logged
NECRO-99
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 478


Androsynth Combat Tactics Specialist


View Profile WWW
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #8 on: July 27, 2006, 09:27:52 pm »

C&C Renegade is fun- I love running around as a NOD Flame Trooper on multiplayer and incinerating the guys that try to sneak into our base!

I like Generals/Zero Hour too...the GLA bikes are the sweetest thing, putting any infantry unit on the bike. Play as Rodall Juhziz and they start with Terrorists on them. High speed bombs! I also like the fact you can put a worker on one to get to a forward base position and set up in relatively short order.
Logged

I love being a clone. Everything I do bad gets blamed on the real me!
Anthony
*Smell* controller
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 358


Star Control Lives!


View Profile WWW
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #9 on: July 29, 2006, 10:05:32 pm »

Nice graphics.  If only I had a faster computer and more money...  Roll Eyes
Logged

Deus Siddis
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1387



View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2006, 05:30:29 am »

I have generals, but not zero hour. The weapons in zero hour seemed too weird to me- unarmed dirt bikes that infantry ride in temporarily (what happens to the bike when they dismount?) and helicopter bunkers.

Generals itself is a good game from a gameplay standpoint, but I missed the storyline and general feel of the original series.
Logged
Draxas
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044



View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #11 on: July 31, 2006, 06:13:31 pm »

I second that sentiment. I've had a copy of Generals sitting around for several years now (but just recently got my hands on a graphics card powerful enough to run it). Having played through most of the game's single player, I'm not really all that impressed; Red Alert 2 seemed like a much more fulfilling experience, and a better fleshed out game. Generals is rather plotless, it seems like the 3 campaigns are only marginally related at best, and the fact that the most effective fighing force (IMO, anyway) is a bunch of guys running around in 30+ year-old Soviet tech is sort of rediculous.

I've found a few really annoying gameplay quirks (selecting enemy targets that are hiding behind buildings, for example, or the fact that your troops don't defend themselves if something is shooting at them from beyond their weapons range), but the game seems mostly solid... It's just that it also feels like a step back from its predecessor.

I look forward to a return to one of the older plotlines.
Logged
Deus Siddis
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1387



View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #12 on: August 03, 2006, 05:24:09 pm »

Quote
Generals is rather plotless, it seems like the 3 campaigns are only marginally related at best, and the fact that the most effective fighing force (IMO, anyway) is a bunch of guys running around in 30+ year-old Soviet tech is sort of rediculous.

Agreed. Two superpowers against an iron age rebel band, does not an interesting conflict make. At least in Starcraft, the rednecks get spaceships. Smiley


Quote
or the fact that your troops don't defend themselves if something is shooting at them from beyond their weapons range)

To stop this, you must use the guard area command, then they'll attack anybody who enters that range. I think this was put into place to prevent "leading" where someone takes a few shots at your troops and then has them retreat through a mine field or such. Your troops follow and get blown apart. So basically, the designers of Generals made it so that your troops would hold position as default, and not chase nearby enemies unless ordered to (instead of you having to remember to tell them to stay put like in Starcraft 64, which inevitable ends up with you watching helplessly, as a dozen of your rogue mutas get psistormed into vapors, after chasing a few zealots into a protoss stronghold.)


Hopefully Generals was just so they could get their sea legs, with respect to 3D RTS (which was still somewhat new at the time, and hadn't really had a major success yet, if I recall correctly.)

Now, they've had Generals and BFME I+II to perfect the SAGE engine on, so they should be able to concentrate on the other things that make a C&C game what it should be. As I understand it, one of the two or so main developers of the series is working for EA on this, so we'll all just have to hope that he is the real talent behind the series, and can pull something off that feels authentic with Tiberium Wars.
Logged
Draxas
Enlightened
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1044



View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #13 on: August 03, 2006, 06:14:20 pm »

Quote
Generals is rather plotless, it seems like the 3 campaigns are only marginally related at best, and the fact that the most effective fighing force (IMO, anyway) is a bunch of guys running around in 30+ year-old Soviet tech is sort of rediculous.

Agreed. Two superpowers against an iron age rebel band, does not an interesting conflict make. At least in Starcraft, the rednecks get spaceships. Smiley

Saddest thing is, in each of the superpower campaigns, once I start capturing the facilities that produce these "iron age" weapons (which is another gripe I have with the game; it's way to easy to capture facilities. At least you had to figure out a way to get those unarmed engineers inside the enemy buildings in the older games, now you can just use any old generic trooper and don't even need to sacrifice him.), I'll often end up using them more often than the default type I can normally build. Now, I'm all for allowances made to keep gameplay balanced, but this is just stupid. There should be no reason that a commander of a modern army would want to use cold war tech.

Quote
Quote
or the fact that your troops don't defend themselves if something is shooting at them from beyond their weapons range)

To stop this, you must use the guard area command, then they'll attack anybody who enters that range. I think this was put into place to prevent "leading" where someone takes a few shots at your troops and then has them retreat through a mine field or such. Your troops follow and get blown apart. So basically, the designers of Generals made it so that your troops would hold position as default, and not chase nearby enemies unless ordered to (instead of you having to remember to tell them to stay put like in Starcraft 64, which inevitable ends up with you watching helplessly, as a dozen of your rogue mutas get psistormed into vapors, after chasing a few zealots into a protoss stronghold.)

I can definitely understand where they're coming from with this, since I had that problem of having my defensive forces drawn off a bit at a time constantly in the other games. However, it really seems like units that are not  on active attack orders are sometimes completely oblivious to the enemy, despite being shot at; I frequently find that, when I notice this happening, my units don't need to move at all in order to attack that random foe that's harassing them. They're just simply actively ignoring it for whatever reason, almost as if they're trying to apply the "if I can't see you, you don't exist" brand of logic to the situation. I've had groups of tanks wiped out by a single technical before because I had my attention wrapped up elsewhere, and there's no excuse for something like that happening.

Quote
Hopefully Generals was just so they could get their sea legs, with respect to 3D RTS (which was still somewhat new at the time, and hadn't really had a major success yet, if I recall correctly.)

Now, they've had Generals and BFME I+II to perfect the SAGE engine on, so they should be able to concentrate on the other things that make a C&C game what it should be. As I understand it, one of the two or so main developers of the series is working for EA on this, so we'll all just have to hope that he is the real talent behind the series, and can pull something off that feels authentic with Tiberium Wars.

One can only hope. However, I will wait and see. I seem to always get excited about EA's initial release in a series that they take over, and always seem to wind up disappointed by them, no matter how long I decide to pursue that series. The James Bond games are a case in point. Hopefully they do better with this one, but I'm not going to hold my breath.
Logged
Baltar
*Many bubbles*
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 109



View Profile
Re: Command and Conquer 3
« Reply #14 on: August 04, 2006, 01:39:09 am »

So....anyone else think the Blizzard and Westwood RTSs aren't all that and are just waiting for Supreme Commander?
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!