Sonic 297 Posted June 20, 2013 We have had so many of these videos lately that they are all starting to blur together, I think. More coverage of the new Command & Conquer is in this video interview. Machinima talks about generals, e-sports and free-to-play with Bryan Farina, producer of Command & Conquer. Don't forget, we have more video content from the new Command & Conquer at this year's E3 on . Share this post Link to post
Plok 328 Posted June 20, 2013 I'll be honest - I've quit watching these because they were all the same. Is this one different? Share this post Link to post
Johnnyxp64 20 Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) ok this is a bit better video, not an amature production, but basically yeah its the same with other videos from this year E3. they didnt said anything new... and thats because imho, the game it self is done in a great percent, BUT they have yet almost no idea how they are gona Market this as a F2P game, its been more than a year, and they are telling us exactly the same info regarding how this is going to work since last year...! in 1 year 365days they havent nailed nothing yet? strange. thats a bit worrying for me! makes me want this to be a full retail game at 50$ or so but with everything from day 1, and not an online service with an uncertain future.... ...because lets be realistic, the future of this game will be based on what "money" people will spent on it online. thats it. we have seen AGE of Empires Online what fate had after what? only 1 year out? now is "dead" because was not "worth supporting it"....and not even playable from everywhere! online games are HARD to make them give you back money: world of warcraft (yes i know its not f2p) survived 10+ years because they where the first big company, and still they are keep adding content in a constant Live world.(that people even get addicted in an unhealthy way!) this cant happen with an RTS i think! take a look also in the fate of the Trion's game MMORTS (ex westowood guys) "End of Naions" that never seen the day-light and its basically postponed for ever! now imagine (not to hard to do so), if you have spend money on this online service, and one day they decide to terminate it! that's it you are scrued! you can't play the game you spent money on it anymore and maybe you liked, because they found it not "worth supporting!". but if it was an offline retail product, worst case like today with Zero Hour, you will keep playing this baby with unofficial patches for as logn as you like! but in this case 1 year later and still EA or Victory seem to have no clue on how they are going to "sell" this to us!!!! very basic idea only. and to see a such nice looking game, failing because of wrong marketing....will be really sad! also the threat "if you want service keep paying DLCs" eventually will not work, for example you want a single player? +20$, want new generals +5$, and this DLC and that DLC, bla bla bla...=average cost way more than 50$ at the end and people will just abandon it. so that makes me a bit worry when i see videos of the new CnC that all are saying "we dont know yet this", "we dont have the details on that", "we havent decided yet", "its too early on this" etc etc... i don't like that on this stage of the developement! reminds me Diablo 3, promises that 1 year later never happened, and was a VERY bad unfinished product on launch day. Edited June 21, 2013 by Johnnyxp64 Share this post Link to post
AZ-Stalker 88 Posted June 20, 2013 It's stated in the interview that the F2P service model can allow them to "support" the game for a longer period of time. So what happens if they go bankrupt or stop supporting it for some reason in the future? If they don't boundle it up and set it as a standalone install (with LAN connectivity like most boxed games) at one point, we will lose the ability to play the game for ever if something happens to or within EA that shuts down C&C in the (far?) future. Just putting it out there, in case anyone hasn't though about this. All previous C&C games can be played as standalone installs, while this service model (with all it's "pros") forces us to completely depend on EA's survival (along with a constant internet connection). No EA (or who ever keeps it running) means no game. Just to note for comparison, many older games that have dead/inactive/bankrupt/closed studios behind them are still very playable because they are independent of online servers and constant updates, not to mention modding freedom and potential for keeping them alive through the ideas and dedication of true fans - not just the initial developers or publishers. Share this post Link to post
Guest Rabbit Posted June 21, 2013 I suspect that in the long run, someone will create a script or something that you just install and emulates a constant server connection. Same thing was done for the newest Sim City. It'll take some work, but it's certainly still doable. Share this post Link to post
Gben 20 Posted June 21, 2013 I don't have an issue with a free-to-play game no longer being supported in the future... it's free to play afterall. I don't see any reason for the publisher to release an offline patch for said game. The game is provided as-is. Share this post Link to post
Johnnyxp64 20 Posted June 21, 2013 (edited) I suspect that in the long run, someone will create a script or something that you just install and emulates a constant server connection. Same thing was done for the newest Sim City. It'll take some work, but it's certainly still doable. its not so "simple" the frostbite 2 engine is a true client server engine, that means it doesnt "jsut asks for online authentication" from the server but does a lot of work on the server side and sends them to the client. if this is going to be the case you cant emulate something that is not evailable offline to the client because you cant reverse engineer it! it will be at least VERY VERY difficult (sniffing encrypted packages etc). SIm City was an offline game, everything is evailable and runs in the client side, they jsut added and authentication and cloud saves function to it and wrap it up, and "disabled - hide" the offline function! thats why was easily "patched" for offline gaming. I don't have an issue with a free-to-play game no longer being supported in the future... it's free to play afterall. I don't see any reason for the publisher to release an offline patch for said game. The game is provided as-is. as i and AZ-Stalker said above, its not an excuse "its free" aso "we can shut it down when ever we like"! Even if EA magically happens to find the amazing super wow formula and indeed make this a not P2W game (which i seriously dought that there will be one single human to unlock everything without paying a single $ to this. Unless he has no life at all), even if they manage to do that and you are this amazing lifeless guy that unlocks always everything without paying a single $, you have invested my friend TIME! and Time is Money! and will suck when you will loose all you progress because they decided to shut it down. the only way for this to survive if they cant support it, is for them to be fair (nuh not the EA style), and release a final patch that will contain all the server side functions the game need and will be offline playable for ever. Edited June 21, 2013 by Johnnyxp64 Share this post Link to post
