What improvement would Generals/ZH need the most?

[Thierry 0]

What do you think could use an improvement?

[General Leang 0]

Good question. I have a laundry list of improvements that could be made, but for now I will concentrate on the list here.

 

*Storyline. At worst previous Command & Conquer games had an okay story, perhaps the best having any (pardon the pun) nods to Kane, or the Nod ending in Tiberium Dawn. Who expected to see Kane appear to advise Stalin, or that he was Cabal? And the Nod ending was not an outright end, or victory, over the enemy. Using the Ion Cannon to discredit GDI was just another step in the story. Whenever the story might fail, it more than made up for in character. Wise @$$ commandos, cool women, ham acting, James Earl Jones and Michael Beihn starring in perhaps the best overall story. What did Generals have storywise? The news that dominates our headlines made into a game, as well as each unit having it's own personnality from the cool (Colonel Burton, China's Dragon Tank) to the annoying (Paladin) to the offensive (USA rocket soldier, about half of the GLA). Zero Hour continued this trend with it's individual generals, and there was a more concise story told through the use of news bullitons, but what else can be done? How about Kane appears to lead the GLA? I suspect not, but maybe EA could think up a good storyline for any sequal they might produce.

 

*Reality. Generals jumping on the war on Iraq and war on terrorism bandwagon is a double edged sword. On the one hand even the most stingent anti war protester wouldn't mind going down in history for killing or capturing Osama Bin Laden, and not only is Generals one of the best ways to fulfil such fantasies as fighting Islamic terrorists, it is about as close as you can get to fighting Al Qaeda in a game. Conversely, if you wish to prove China to be a superior power to America or to play as terrorists and hurt innocent people, this game sastifies those desires. However, on the other hand this faithfulness to the world as it is today includes topics that either hit too close to home or come across as tasteless. Without bemeaning the game, some of these include portraying Bush and Tony Blair as great leaders when they were facing opposition to their stance on Iraq, the jingoism of America and some of it's units (it's rocket soldier's quotes of "I want to blow something up" being an example) and, unfortunatly for those who enjoy playing as the GLA, many of the aspects of the terrorist group. I won't go into details about them, but suffice to say there are some things that could have been forsaken so that it doesn't deliver as hard a blow to those who are sensitive about some of the topics in the game.

 

*Actors. Frankly, some of the characters in Generals are annoying, not just script wise but in how they come across. General Kwai for example is a giggling idiot, and this well might be how he is meant to be, but some of the generals grate on your nerves after a while. I'm not asking to have Ray Wise, Barry Corbin and Kari Wuhrer replace Townes, Granger and Alexandra...maybe try and not have some of the characters sound like try hards is all.

 

Rest look pretty right. I shall work out how to put other improvements into words.

[Thierry 0]

Big list. If they were to make a game with the Generals engine, you would the best bestseller since...I don't know...

[Gazdude 0]

Its BORING..........

 

Thats the problem... It needs more exitement

[Thierry 0]

Well, do you have any idea's on adding some, sunshine?

[Gazdude 0]

Throw it in the bin

[Thierry 0]

You can do that if you want, but its staying over here.

What do you think t'he worst is about Generals then, Gazdude?

[Guest Yello_man]

All C&C games are quite similar to each other; build and conquer. C&C games should allow the player to choose where to attack giving the player more option and adds more strategy to the game, instead building hundreds of troops and slaughtering the enemy. It's too easy!

[General Leang 0]

To stop rushing, how about replacing the resource gathering system and having bases that can only deploy a certain number of troops? For example, have a barrecks that comes with 100 soldiers, and 20 of those can be rocket soldiers, 5 commandos, 15 snipers, 10 engineers and the rest infantry. Or each arms depot (for large missions you might have two or three barrecks, airfields and such) can deploy a certain amount of each tank.

[Thierry 0]

Would be nice. But then you could always run into limits.

[Gazdude 0]

Generals should have been an ore harvesting game, it shouldve used a construction yard aswell.........

[Thierry 0]

Would you like the game then? Or is there something else the Mr.Gazdude doesn't like about Generals.

[Koen 2]

Generals' resource system is broken. It is boring, and most of the time you are waiting for money to build something.

You should try Rise of Nations - it's a fast-paced RTS with traits of Age of Empires and Civilization. It's really good - and even though it's an isometric game (like RA2/YR) - the graphics look good, and you can zoom in and out - just no rotation.

[Thierry 0]

Well, Generals/ZH has no rotation either. Only Emperor and Warcraft 3 have it for my knowledge. I can't wait for the next C&C game with the SAGE engine 8)

[General Leang 0]

You can rotate the playing firlds by pressing the arrows on the number pad.

[Gazdude 0]

Gens n ZH have rotation Thierry.... You didn't know that?

 

Cmon i mean, i play the game VERY rarely and i know that........

[Thierry 0]

Uhmmmm.... I geuss not. Its also confusing at times. I thought you hated Generals/ZH,yet you know that rotation stuff...

[Koen 2]

Well, Generals/ZH has no rotation either.

It does! And zooming too. Mouse wheel + numkey pad, just like Better Red than Dead said!

[Thierry 0]

Yeah, I know zoom. Too bad you can't zoom out very far, like in Emperor.

[General Leang 0]

Back on topic, how about having a storyline that branched out depending on how well you do during the missions? For example, Wing Commander has a winning track and a losing track depending on how well you do. If you fail a few missions then you would end up God knows where against stiff opposition as you try and fight your way back. Lose enough and you will come up against a mission you cannot win, and you get the losing end game. A similar concept could work well in Generals.

[Gazdude 0]

I know it ain't a stratagie game but Silent Hill has a similar thing, and making an alternate campaigne route for a stratagie game would be intresting....

 

I'm not sure whether Warzone 2100 did or not... :?

[osey 2003 0]

strange that he dint know that...... u can also hold the mouse wheel or the middle mouse button on a 3 button mouse to rotate the view, and the same with the world builder... k slightly off topic soo maybe the biggest thing about generals that needs improved wuld have to be EA!

[Gazdude 0]

If just Westwood made Gens would it have the SAGE engine?

[Thierry 0]

Don't know. Depends if EA invented it or westwood.

[Gazdude 0]

Na come to think of it if Westwood made it it would be a totally different game.....