Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
keithktam

i just realized how much stuff they stole form StarCraft 2

Recommended Posts

i just realized EA stole a lot of stuff from StarCraft2, they probably think they are corporately clever.

i don't think i have to state much to prove cause you guys for sure have noticed for a long time anyway.

i remember they said about how they didn't want to make the ship's propulsions look like frame but a more non flame like cause they think it was better?? they did it because they saw StarCraft 2 ships flame and copied it, and they made you believe that spent great effort to do that to make they game good and unique....

the second one was slightly off rail a little bit; they said that they hated C&C4 to have a repeated/used credit system, namely Tib harvesting mechanism, and they also said that the new story of C&C4 would need a new mechanism because of the introduction of TCN. Now i am sure you guys know the real reason for that.... i think the truth is in reverse: they wanted a new mechanism right at the beginning and they created TCN and the story to wrap around it.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I agree with the last sentence, but what does this have to do with SC2?

Share this post


Link to post

take a look at the star craft 2 game play, go to youtube for instance. look at the propulsion rendering for the battlecruser and compare with the Kodiak and the Nod Salamander, you will see what i mean. and the design for HellFire is identical to C&C4's Nod Marauder. the starcraft 2's FCV with the GDI's engineer is another good example. The last one, now this is controversial, I even suspect the cartoony looks in RA3 and C&C4 were created to counter act the visual of starcraft2, but then i am fully aware of the fact that RA3 and C&C4 use the same engine.

Share this post


Link to post

Just a little problem with your theory... No C&C games have been released since SC2. Just sayin'

Share this post


Link to post
i just realized EA stole a lot of stuff from StarCraft2, they probably think they are corporately clever.

 

It's not only SC2 that EA may be using from (stolen isn't the word I would say), so did Company of Heroes. Capturing a TCN point is actually similar to capturing a strategic point in COH. The enemy will attempt to re-capture it unless defenses are made around captured points.

 

Now i am sure you guys know the real reason for that.... i think the truth is in reverse: they wanted a new mechanism right at the beginning and they created TCN and the story to wrap around it.

 

True. But it didn't work very well. The use of "credits" winded up missing in the gameplay.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Just a little problem with your theory... No C&C games have been released since SC2. Just sayin'

 

i can understand. but the fact was that there has been Beta release and other kind of testing going on during the development phase of SC2 (wouldn't have official stuff to back though), remember that, the old saying around the net for SC2: just because StarCraft2 are gonna be awesome, doesn't mean that we like waiting for it forever!

 

the announcement of sc2 took place before RA3 was out. and remember this also, now you can say i am stretching it, EA is a super size Corporation in a commercial sector, and do you know the nick name for this sector: warzone baby! and spy would be use in war, i am sure many of you heard of the myths of sleazy tactic that had been employed by big Corp just like EA, namely speaking: CocaCola and Microsoft. However, let me remind the haters here, I am "stretching" it.

Share this post


Link to post

Didn't a couple people involved with C&C sign up with Blizzard for SC2? Such as Starcraft 2's lead designer, Dustin Browder, who was lead for RA2, Generals, and a designer for the BFME games? Uh oh, maybe you have this whole thing backwards.

 

But that abortion C&C4 was specifically made to cater to the Starcraft-saturated Asian competitive-RTS market if I'm not mistaken, so any Starcraft like aspects there are probably intentional.

Share this post


Link to post

I played SC2, it was basically SC1 with better graphics and some different units. Some neat little level designs sure. But I kept having a feeling I already played it before. To me that ain't a good thing. I am gonna stick with Dune 2000 and C&C3.

Share this post


Link to post
I played SC2, it was basically SC1 with better graphics and some different units. Some neat little level designs sure. But I kept having a feeling I already played it before. To me that ain't a good thing. I am gonna stick with Dune 2000 and C&C3.

Because you haven't played those before...?

Share this post


Link to post
Because you haven't played those before...?

 

SC2 is basically SC1 in 3D.

Share this post


Link to post
i just realized EA stole a lot of stuff from StarCraft2, they probably think they are corporately clever.

No they didn't. But its clear C&C 4 "borrows" concepts from other modern RTS games.

 

Didn't a couple people involved with C&C sign up with Blizzard for SC2? Such as Starcraft 2's lead designer, Dustin Browder, who was lead for RA2, Generals, and a designer for the BFME games? Uh oh, maybe you have this whole thing backwards.

Browder quit EA years ago and moved over to Blizzard way before way before SC2 was announced I think.

 

But that abortion C&C4 was specifically made to cater to the Starcraft-saturated Asian competitive-RTS market if I'm not mistaken, so any Starcraft like aspects there are probably intentional.

Yes C&C 4 began it's life at some Asian based EA studio, according to Sam Bass. They liked C&C 3 but wanted a streamlined way to play it, hence the Crawler/Mobile base idea. Listen to the EA Podcast with Sam Bass, where he explains it all http://forums.cncnz.com/index.php?showtopi...&hl=podcast.

 

Fail topic is fail.

I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
SC2 is basically SC1 in 3D.

And that's a bad thing, why?

Share this post


Link to post

When fail topic is fail, in before the lock. :rolleyes:

 

I think we're through with this discussion since we are getting way off topic.

Edited by purplescrin

Share this post


Link to post
When fail topic is fail, in before the lock. :rolleyes:

A little hypocritical there, methinks... :facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×