Saracen

Koen (who's been to CommandCOM on CNCNZ's representation) was a strong part of the SunAge Community. He went to the developer's community summit for the game, gave feedback and everything.... I'd say out of everyone here, Koen has the deepest understanding and knowledge of this game than anyone else. He loved it! I was an abassador for this game originally. I personally hated it when it was released. The game was rather buggy, crashes were common,the AI often was too strange and inconsistent most of the time, and there was a whole host of other problems, including a lack of Multiplayer and Skirmish mode... The game at best was very mediocre, so I ended up selling it to some unfortunate chap who probably smashed it with a sledgehammer afterwards. Koen informed me however, that the game was significantly improved, and did have Multiplayer patched in... However, I was already too put off the game to care at that point. Even the likes of 1up, IGN and a few others who decided to re-review it still saw it as nothing short of crap, even by late 90's standards. So I chose not to pursue buying it again from the bargain bin despite Koen's claims. Can't say I miss it anyway... It's better than some RTS games I've had the misfortune to play over the years, but there's a good few hundred other titles that are infinitely better.

So much for the World in Conflict style play the developers have been talking about then. This is (for lack of better example) pure Dawn of War 2 style gameplay. Domination in WiC, which is a similar mode here was based around each team having around 1000 points each, but in a visual and not numerical representation. It meant capturing points and holding on. However, the domination bar in the GUI would shift dependant on the most dominant side. If you had more strategic areas, you'd gain more points and the bar would fill with your side's flag, while the other side's flag got smaller... The winner was the side who either won total domination, or had the most domination advantage after the time limit expired, who then was crowned the victor. It was only once you dominated the all the Strategic areas, would the domination bar move twice as fast. This type of domination game play is much better in my book. I found Dawn of War's numerical style rather tedious, since even if there was a strong chance of a late comeback by the your team's side, you'd still be losing points until you claim total domination of all areas. In WiC, that isn't the case. If you capture half or more of the points, the domination bar stops and you get points back. The opposing team then loses points in a tug of war fashion. WiC offered more versatile Tactical and Strategic opportunities, as well as greater incentives to win. At no point in the Multiplayer arena did you concede defeat unless you were being steamrolled, or inevitably did not have the ability to manage a comeback for your own total domination. In DoW2, matches could be decided by the 500 point mark with very little chance of a tactical change which would see your team win. Sure it was sometimes possible by beating the opposing side within 1-25 points at times. But the sheer frustration of having a bad start, and then becoming the better side, and still losing, really ticked me off! At least in WiC, in the face of almost certain defeat and with (for example) 25-50 points left. You could still try some last resort tactics by using all those stockpiled command points for the heavy support powers, stopping the domination bar in its tracks by capturing enemy territory, and still somehow in the comeback be credited with an extra 1,000 points just in time to see the timer run out, and attain victory. The sheer intensity and adrenaline rush of winning in that fashion, was nothing short of bloody fantastic!

It's really a fact now that like Westwood used the head for box-art.... Now EA are using the X shape... It's their own stylised tradition for game recognition... let the sleeping dog lie Silverthorn. Your continuous whining makes me realise that WW Fanatic, is an Acronym for Emo... It's in there, trust me!

They bowed to fan pressure then. Doesn't surprise me. I was expecting the huge ani-climax anyway.... At least Silverthorn will have one when he sees this! Edit: zOMG!!! Tiberian!!!!111oneoneoneone Enough Sarcasm

C&C 4: Paradigm Subversion God knows, I hated it at first, but then it got catchy

It's the same for most Japanese products really. Their Cars are also a prime example. They still need the usual maintenance... but holy crap they seem to last forever! Not the best cars in the world to drive, but their reliability is without question.

When I saw this I thought "Already!!?? This early?" I honestly question Sony's Motives right now. Normally they don't release a refined version of a console until at least 5 years minimum into their so-called "10 year console life-cycle"... To me it looks like they're struggling to get any real sales figures. Which is true because I sold my PSP this morning and bought a Nintendo DS instead because Sony haven't got a clue how to support the PSP (As I've mentioned in my blog). Even if they had the world's best marketing team, and publishers behind it, they'd still mess the whole thing up! There's no decent titles coming out for it, but it was a bloody great paper weight! It's kinda like the PS3 right now as well really. If the likes of EA and other publishers weren't so willing to make their games Multi-format, Sony would be right up s**t's creek. Cos as far as I can gather, their exclusive title range is still rather pants. Anyway, the PS3 slim actually has a less powerful Cell processor inside it, which is actually cheaper to manufacture. It still renders the games the same. But in order to have the same performance, they had to cut loads of crap off the original PS3's Operating system to keep things running just as well. As it stands, the original 60GB launch model is actually the best of all the PS3 models... it still has backward compat, 4 USB ports, a memory card reader and about 101 other things that the new Slim doesn't. While the Slim does have improved storage, and memory, and data transfer over the original... it's all to help against the cut down processor's performance. They say in the article it's the same thing (but smaller)... But like they're going to admit that... that'd only generate bad press, and the 360 fanboys would have a field day! So yeah, in order for Sony to cut costs (since the original was being manufactured at a loss per unit vs retail price)... the Slim is the result. It may visually look the same and perform the same. But it's technical power is probably less than that of a 360 now.. whereas previously it had a very slight power and performance advantage over Microsoft's Console. Not a bad system... But my launch model is still going well... and I'd prefer one of those over any other version released to date.

Personally I'm not bothered with what EA do with the C&C franchise. It's theirs after all, and that's the end of the story. I don't care if they decide to send it off in a different direction or whatever. Anyone ever play the RTS S.W.I.N.E? If they did something like that, I'd be a bit dubious, but I'd still have a go at it even for some curious entertainment factor. The idea of giving it to Petroglyph made me laugh. Nowadays they'd probably ruin it beyond expectation. And Jet Set wouldn't touch the franchise with a 25ft Barge Pole. If they were forced to have it, it'd be console only, and they'd probably rip it to shreds anyway so it works better for the casual games market. Although Red Alert on the iPhone would be right up their street as a one off, but that's as far as it'd go. I'd just like to say that keeping Westwood in mind is the worst thing any fan can do. I was like that and look where it got me... I hated the franchise, I hated EA for the changes and found myself to be an over-zealous nut job. I had to stand down as a member of staff of this site because my views did not coincide with the Status Quo. Had I kept an open mind, and had an acceptable passion for the Franchise, I could still be co-webmaster of this site, posting news, and doing what I enjoyed for 9 years, but I didn't. Instead I had to be an asshole and throw all that out the window by Betraying Apoc and Sonic. It was totally wrong, it was uncalled for, and it was idiocy at its finest. But I've moved on, mistake made. CNCNZ has most probably become a better place without me, and I'm glad it's looking and running better than ever before... I'm here because C&C 4 is an RTS game with some interesting changes, plus the Multiplayer aspect has my attention for the "World in Conflict" inspired gameplay... what happens with lore, mechanics and root structure of the franchise has no real concern for me... C&C is an RTS, I am a gamer... C&C is not a lifestyle, it's just a game. So being a so-called Westwoodian is really just plain over-zealous nonsense and the non-acceptance that the Games industry moves on and it's a dog-eat-dog out there. Put simply, when it comes to being a Westwoodian......It's just not healthy!

I think it's time for these people to get off their high horse... The horse is dead, it's been flogged, fed Drugs to stiffen it up again, had CPR, been shocked, stuck in cryogenic storage, and now it's been stuffed and sitting in someone's living room. I imagine Westwood is rather like Michael Jackson right now. Saving the franchise, that is actually like saying bring Michael Jackson to life again. The smell of this dead rotting corpse really needs to be laid to rest. Passion, Loyalty or whatever cannot save it.... Get with the idea of moving on, or move onto another Franchise and save your keyboard some stress!

I'm getting a feeling that many people have been missing the point. Many times have EALA announced that this is the end of the Kane Storyline, not the Franchise. I have a strong feeling that we'll see a spin off in the Tiberium Universe which will follow the Scrin, and their origins. We could then go on a long journey with them, introduce new factions, Gameplay mechanics, and even going as far as to branch into other RTS sub-genres. The idea is cliché with aliens, fighting aliens. But maybe we'll have new characters to like, stories to follow a canon to open up. As I've been in favour of C&C 4's change in gameplay mechanics, I will also be in favour of EALA tearing the Westwood Legacy to shreds. At least that way the developers have no restriction in their effort to create something a little more fresh and new. C&C has so many chances to branch off the original tree. Tree's also create seeds which flower new trees... let it happen I say. This is technically a "Universe" after all... and so far this Tiberium universe has been stuck in just one solar system... time to expand and find out what's really out there!

I raise you the College Humour version (Perhaps NSFW)

I wouldn't say that at all..... But it does look like Fallout 3 on a factory full of Steroids! And for me that's gotta be a good thing!

NFS: Shift has a lot of work to do.... Need for Speed was great up to Most Wanted, but the last 3 games were really not worth the money or time to play with. Carbon was too distant from Underground 2... it lacked any decent design decisions, the soundtrack was sub-par and the life was just sucked out of it. Pro-street was a handbrake turn for the series and it really ended up in a ditch. Design decisions were once again brought to a head in that. Player progression was just absolutely awful, the soundtrack was far from upto scratch once again, the cars handled strangely and the format of legal street racing just didn't work. Undercover was a little better, it got a little closer to that underground feeling. But it had been done time and time before. The story was laughable and for the most part pointless, most of the races and events were pretty much too similar, the cars still handled like pigs, plus the frame rate was quite bad at times. It felt rushed and unfinished. So as I said, Shift has a lot to live up to and even more to prove against the competition out there. The Standard is so much higher these days when it comes to Arcade Racers. The 360 has it's own IPs which are actually great fun to play. Gran Turismo? The less said about that the better, considering most the cars handle the same anyway it can hardly be called a real driving simulator... Racedriver: GRID is the best multi-platform example of how racers like this should be done, and then there's SimBin's PC format GTR Franchise, which quite frankly puts all the others to dust. Anyway, Brutual Legend is up there, so it'll be great to see more of Tim Schafer's Masterpiece. But the game I'm looking forward to most isn't even on there.. It actually belongs to Ubisoft and it's called R.U.S.E.

That's gone up since last year then. The rate in 2008 was around 40.3%... I can't understand why it's that high though given MS were supposed to have fixed the inherent flaw in the 360's manufacture. It's like owning an Aston Martin Vantage kitted with with parts from a 1975 Trabant... something just isn't right there!

So really what you'd be saying there is that Microsoft's own certification process (which is considered law to developers who develop for the PC Live platform and the 360) is a joke too. Would you want a game that consistantly locks up your system, or requires you to connect to Live just to use it, or worse still contains code which would only allow you to play that disc on your own 360? (The former which that the likes of EA and Konami are in favour of to kill the pre-owned games market) The Console manufacturers all have their own versions of the Bill of rights in place already. This protects the hardware, the consumer and the manufacturer itself. Such rules are well in place in console development, and if they're not adhered to, then the game/patch/DLC or whatever will not see the light of day. As it stands Stardock realise that the PC is the only platform where such rules do not exist in earnest because no one company controls the hardware. The Bill of rights sets out to attempt to add some stability to the platform, and allow a standard code of practice which can in turn protect gamers and developers alike. So to say it's a joke Sonic, is really a form of ignorance to the fact that most of the industry already has something like this in place. If it didn't, then we'd have have rogue publishers doing what the hell they liked to stop Piracy... which isn't true afterall... it's all about killing the pre-owned market. But if you kill that, you might as well shut down every single games retailer on the planet right now... because the pre-owned market is bigger than the new sales market, and it's what keeps retail stores open. But of course, this is what EA and Konami wish to stop, since it eats into their profits. And part reason why the console manufacturers want the pre-owned market to stay, is because cheap 2nd hand games sells hardware... and this is another reason the Bill of rights (in whatever form) is in place in the console industry.

I'm with the multiplayer on this one. The huge amounts of units (or customisation of those units) coupled with the potentially similar world in conflict style Gameplay has generated a lot of interest for me. As I've said in the past WiC became online crack cocaine for me. I was nothing short of nuts about it, and played it at a strong competitive level. So if C&C 4 can manage a similar experience then I'm sold on it. As for the downside... well, 2 things really. this DRM rubbish of being online does have it's downsides. It has some rather excellent positives of course. But I've always felt that Single Player should be a purely offline experience. All this so called "offline hack cheating" is perhaps without a doubt their political spin to justify their actions, but I dunno. Stardock are on board with their Gamers Bill of Rights, which now has the support of Blizzard-Activision, Ubisoft, THQ, 2K, Atari and Capcom to name a few... Maybe EA should look at the Gamers Bill of rights once again and change their DRM practice to reflect the "Impulse Driven" network of publishers. Single player is purely offline, you register your key with the online network, and you get your updates, patches, multiplayer gaming etc from there. With this model is the only way to get them too. Much like Steam. This is the online business model of the future. Not EA's way. Secondly. I just hope this game isn't going to suffer the typical EA online "Sims 3" syndrome. It's a common thing with EA to leave half the content out of the game. There's a potential 80+ units in C&C 4, sure, but say if we only get 35-40 to unlock. And if we want the rest, we'll have to pay premium on top to access them. Other games like the Tiger Woods and Need for speed franchise are purposely having pre-made content left out of the game so they can be sold as DLC... the result is that the packaged game appears to have less and less "offline" standard content with each progressive title. However, the public are still being charged full price for what is effectively nowadays, half a game. This arguably is an unfair trade practice in my book. I can understand the micro-expansion model. But extra content should help enhance the original game and its gameplay. Stardock & Ironclad released the Sins of a Solar Empire expansion, "Entrenchment" Earlier this year... for $10, it improved huge gaps in the original release, and brought about some strong significant changes. Fallout 3 had great DLC, as do many others. All of which gave a much more enjoyable and richer experience to their titles... But EA's way of doing things, I just can't get my head around it.

Sins of a Solar Empire - PC I don't know what it is, but there's something satisfying about taking hours, even days to complete a single battle in this game. Deep, great pacing and a real blast to play. My game of 2008 bar none!

Graphically, the engine holds itself rather well. Gameplay (as others have said) is the most important factor. But if we are to touch on Graphics, I'd prefer they be done in the area of polish. Just small details that really attempt to bring the world alive, without the need to sacrifice too much PC power. Minute details on units and structures. Different destruction and idle animations, slight variations in the atmosphere presented etc. The list goes on and on with what can be done. Tiberian Sun, despite being the worst ever C&C for game crippling bugs upon release was awash with little details, lighting, animations and the like. They even went as far to name civilian buildings after the developers. Even the sounds that went into the game gave the sense of a living breathing world. The graphics weren't too impressive, and a lot of the tilesets were rather dull to say the least. But the polish that went into it still makes that game seem rather fresh despite the ageing graphics. I think if the small touches, ambiance, atmosphere, and even the soundtrack can give a sense of a real living world... who cares what it's like graphically?

I actually entered this competition with a really clever subtitle. It fills all 3 criteria, With expressed relativity, and strong originality. It's still only 2 words, but my knowledge of the English language allows my suggested title to speak infinite volumes about the game itself. It may not win, but hey, I believe it's pretty neat. There's no Tiberians/ums, twilights, kanes, wars, Nods, GDIs, unit/zone/character/pet dog names. However, any average Joe who was to see this on a box, would probably have to run to their nearest dictionary after having a full 60 second "WTF" moment. I was going to go a step further and use Latin, but that's a tad excessive! EDIT: An interesting irony actually, after typing this post. I thought I'd see what the words of my title were in Latin. Turns out they're both Latin in origin anyway, so no change was needed! lol

While I may undoubtedly find something within C&C 4 to criticise (No game is perfect after all) I doubt they will be amongst what some people would call slanderous comments of the past. My direct concern about C&C 4 really is the implementation of certain design elements from RA3. The developers have announced a deeper strategic layer, but my concern is its implementation. Likewise it would perhaps not be advisable in my eyes to carry over the arrows and uncovered fog-of-war from previous titles. Such things feel cheap, and in my eyes lessen the experience of what a good RTS should be about. I hold no concerns about the loss of direct base construction, the continued resource gathering etc. Those mechanics are fine. In fact, I'm all in support (like yourself) to the change in the franchise. If I be honest, it's the best thing to happen to Command & Conquer perhaps possibly since the move to 3D. But you have to remember now, I'm not going into C&C 4 as an over zealous fanboy of the franchise who's seeking perfection here. My recent change in the decision to find C&C 3 more fulfilling was down to the fact that I don't now take a certain obsolete company's legacy to heart. It's just better off that way.

You still presume I am the same hater I was before Sonic. Complain about what I've said and done in the past if you wish, but I'm not going there. I'm above all that now, and I'm not going to take sides on the matter. I've looked at the game from a more neutral standpoint, and made that assumption. Disregard the lore and everything that matters to the fanboys... I'm thinking of it as in terms of an RTS and that only. It's the same presumption I will make about C&C 4 as well. If you're pissed off with me, fine. Your judgement entirely. I'm not asking to come back to help you, and I'm not trying to worm my way into people's good books. What people think of me is entirely up to them. But I don't see that they should be publicly having a go at me. After all, it hardly is "professional" now, is it Sonic?

Not necessarily... If you think about it EA jumped in with C&C 3, and created their own patch of lore. Even if it wasn't part of the initial canon, C&C 3 is now as much part of the canon as everything else. The way you have to look at it is that in order to add continuity, you have to develop from C&C 3 as the building blocks, then work the existing canon into place. It's probably not ideal from a fan standpoint, but in truth at least there is some of the original legacy going in. The best way to concept is to actually evolve C&C 3's art into something far more advanced, but not so far that things look completely different. We're not talking 1995 - 2032 TD to TS technology here. Realistically the changes would be minimal... Maybe the firing stability on the shatterer worked well, so GDI have incorporated it into a unit which suffered lower firing stability? I think, as this stands, the last game in this area of the franchise, has to go off with a bang. So attention to detail, whether it's minor or major would be crucial to developing a game which is memorable on all fronts, gameplay, lore storyline etc. included. EALA are going to want this to go out on a high, so it can be amongst the ranks of the classics in years to come. They've probably had that Sam Bass fella who's in charge of the lore, researching and playing all the older games to ensure that what goes into C&C 4 is the right stuff. Based on a few early presumptions.. I don't think C&C 4 is going to be "just another C&C"... comparisons have been made to Dawn of War 2, but I can already tell by the fact that there's a whole host of units and army combinations, that this isn't just a clone of DoW2 either. Sure, Relic's game mechanic works well, but the campaign was really rather pants, and the MP felt rather limiting. The maps and units were too sparse to make it fun enough. So a bit more variety, a stronger story, a good mix of similar and completely new, plus all the rest that's going into this game... and the potential of C&C 4 already trounces similar games in it's class. But that means nothing unless the execution is carried out well.

I went out yesterday and made 2 purchases of games I owned, but sold a while back. So currently playing: Burnout Paradise (Ultimate Box) - Still 101 available things on the DLC despite the massive extras already on the disc C&C 3 - Make of this what you will, but I've finally come to accept the fact that it really is better than I originally made out. Being a over zealous fanboy sucked. A Neutral perspective actually makes a whole lot of difference. As an RTS, it's still old school stuff, but there is something rather pleasing about it. I might even look for Kane's Wrath again on the cheap.

I need not add anything to this. RTS Games with Popcap add some interesting and diverse strategy and tactical opportunities. So it's all good.

It's the Gametrailers TV program which is now live on the site. I came across this trailer purely by watching the Brutal Legend feature on the same GTTV show. This isn't a complaint, but I wish to comment on the canon here. Why the hell would Kane go to GDI if the current state of the earth is the closest yet to the Utopia which he foresaw? Sure Nod isn't exactly booming with resources after their defeat... but if such a fate to the earth is inevitable... why not wait until GDI simply die off?