Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sonic

Official Command & Conquer Site Changed Again

Recommended Posts

EA wants to motivate legacy customers to play Tiberium Alliances. That's all.

Share this post


Link to post

@Userz: There is no Generals 2 news likely - don't start bringing that old dog up again!!!

why not? i want a general sequel it's been over 10 years since zero hour was out, the tiberium and red alert series all had follow up games why not generals? There are even mods out on zero hour that use general 2's units. There is even a mod made by a Chinese mod team for zero hour called generals 2.

Share this post


Link to post

Generals 2 is not happening anytime soon. Generals fans will need to keep waiting and probably for a while. It's easier to do TIb and RA sequels due to the lore while generals lacks story in of itself.

Share this post


Link to post

Generals 2 is not happening anytime soon. Generals fans will need to keep waiting and probably for a while. It's easier to do TIb and RA sequels due to the lore while generals lacks story in of itself.

Hmm. well i would think a general sequel would be a lot easier to make at this point than both RA and Tib.

They already have all the generals 2 assets ready, they just need to whip up a story, polish the game a bit and it's all good to go lol.

The model's themselfs aren't SCI-FI enough for Tib series. Lore wise they pretty much destroyed the Tib story with CnC4, plus they concluded the tib story with kane's ascension and Left GDI with total control of earth.

Problem with RA series is that RA overall theme is very toony, and the generals 2 model would look very awkward compare to the lRA2 and RA3, since they are a bit more realistic looking. so they have to build everything from ground up again which i don't see why they would left all the good assets to waste.

Generals hasn't had a proper sequel in over 10 years plus it's almost the 20th anniversary or Command and Conquer franchise. generals is essentially a blank piece of paper it would be a good fresh reboot of Command and Conquer.

Share this post


Link to post

Well given the fact that C&C turns 20 this year, I have high hopes for at least some news for a new C&C. The marketing literally sells itself because of that alone and to miss an opprotunity like that would be a whole new level of messing up. We all know in 3 years StarCraft and Blizzard are going to do something HUGE for their 20th and I would love to see a revival of the old SC vs C&C debates/Rivalry.

Share this post


Link to post

We all know in 3 years StarCraft and Blizzard are going to do something HUGE for their 20th

 

Was there anything for WarCraft's 20th anniversary last year?

 

and I would love to see a revival of the old SC vs C&C debates/Rivalry.

 

C&C hasn't had much to compete with Blizzard with since EA bought it out :P

 

Let's take it from the top:

 

1994/5 - WarCraft: Orcs & Humans vs. Command & Conquer

1996 - WarCraft II: Tides of Darkness vs. Command & Conquer: Red Alert

Both of these "matchups" were, I'd dare to say, even. Each of the two pairings brought equally well-made games.

(Also, trivia time: the bonus track in WarCraft II: Beyond the Dark Portal, titled "I'm A Medieval Man", is a parody/tribute to Tiberian Dawn's "Mechanical Man" track :D)

 

1998/9 - StarCraft / Brood War vs. Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun / Firestorm

Here's where Blizzard basically won. TS was introduced later, and not without bugs and imbalances that are unfixed to this day. Whereas StarCraft wasn't 100% perfect at release, it got brilliant post-launch support. All TS got was a freeware release in 2011. Not to mention how StarCraft had a never-matched storyline and its multiplayer can only ever be rivaled by a StarCraft or WarCraft sequel. Brood War was a much meatier expansion than Firestorm was, too.

 

WarCraft III vs....???

 

Ok, this one will be tough to think through. WarCraft III had a long development period, with its initial stages looking a bit different from standard RTS games.

 

If we go for:

 

2000/2 - WarCraft III vs. Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2

...we'd get... I've got nothing. I'm having trouble comparing the two.

 

If we go for...

 

2002/3 - WarCraft III: Reign of Chaos / The Frozen Throne vs. Command & Conquer: Generals / Zero Hour

...we'd get a matchup of contemporary games. Both introduced their respective series to the then-rising 3D world. WarCraft III (both the vanilla one and the expansion) had an astounding singleplayer campaign and a well-thought multiplayer component (hey hey, ladders are still going!). It only still has a risk of BSoD'ing on certain sound/graphics cards, but there are workarounds, so... yeah. On the other hand, Generals had... turd. The engine is unoptimized and prone to crashing, critical exploits took 11 years to fix (by the fans, not the devs), the game (especially the expansion) is unbalanced and it barely has any campaigns.

 

The same problem arises with StarCraft II.

 

If we go for...

 

2007/10 - StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty vs. Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars

Both are good in multiplayer and singleplayer (though it's obvious which one is more dominant), and they both have good expansion packs. However, Tiberium Wars was basically ignored not long after it peaked in sales and still has some issues even after (insufficient) patching. EALA's games were left unpatched in console versions, too, which is a shame for its developers. Some designs (e.g. Mothership) are similar or near-identical in both titles. Had SC2 been released around the time TW was, the rivalry could've been revived.

 

If we go for...

 

2010 - StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty vs. Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight

...yeah.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

And that's why I stick on my own ridicuously Gargantuan Mega-Crossover Project

 

The what now?

Share this post


Link to post

Looks like legacy forums in TA is what we get. And my opinion, no special insight just an opinion, is that there is nothing simmering behind the scenes or why do this?

Share this post


Link to post

EA gets voted worse gaming company for a reason.

The idea they actually give a flying **** about their customers is none existant.

So i for one am kindof suprised the forums lasted along as they did. Their was no profit in it, even more so besides the constant i want a beta whiners, the majority of the posts were all about getting their ****ty games running on modernised operating systems. Even worse people bought their special collections, advertised as optimised for win7 or 8 and they ran like garbage. It takes on average, several community patches or solutions to get that horrible **** running.

One of the only things that actually made the forums look positive was probably the modding section. Wich in itself could be seen as: If we want anything positive out of EA games we have to do it ourselfs.

 

CnC looses nothing with the closure of those forums...nothing that made CnC great was on there by EA contribution...it was all community. We loose beta key whining posts, people begging for another generals regurgetated uninspired copy..gone aswell.

 

The more i keep writing this post the more i feel relieved. EA gives not a single **** about their customers, so **** them aswell.

Most my CnC joy is old content....anything past CnC3 i have hardly touched. They can shove their TA browser moneygrubbing **** up their arse, and then have all that madden, tiger woods fifa **** up there aswell.

 

With in a few days Grey goo will be released, gonna play that and hopefully enjoy it more then the starcraft clone t looks to be. And then im going right back to modding c&c3 like nothing ever happened.

 

I figure or atleast hope that alot of the people behind the content on the originals forums will find a way to reconnect over similar content/topics, altho unfortunatly somewhat decentralised across multiple forums.

 

 

 

 


Share this post


Link to post

Lol gray goo is a sc2 clone. It doesn't resemble anything cnc. I think act of aggression will be most likely closer to cnc.

Share this post


Link to post

Well if they are smart, but ****ing lazy, but smart..grey goo should try to copy from SC. Hate it or like SC made blizzard money for its worth. Was SC2 a great story driven game? Hardly, specialy hearth of the swarm was a cheap and lazy money grab on blizzards part... the next one will be aswell. SC aims at a multiplayer crowd. 15 min of rehashed content slapped to 15min of fame internet personalities begging for likes and donations? SC will help you get there.

SC is to livestreams what Spaceballs the Merchandise is to spaceballs...for those who get that reference B)

 

Im looking forward to trying Grey Goo, but i do fear its a simplistic multiplayer driven money grab aimed to fill the awefully painfull void a lack of decent CnC game has left these last few years. But here is hoping it pleasantly suprises.

 

No point in saying anything about AoA...nothing but screenshots or a flimsy trailer out there so far. AoW + high treason were great games, enjoyed them alot. If AoA works from there it might be something to look forward too.

 

The sad thing out of all this is. CnC hasnt been a CnC game in a long time. The closest they ever came (under EA) was the CnC3+its expansion..altho KW was a glorified patch imo...content that shouldve been with the vanilla game....ITs actually a suprise they didnt sold it as day one DLC like everthing post 2005 they tried to do.

Guessing it will be a sad few years for the CnC franchise....the best we can hope for is some cheap regurgetated version of Generals or some sort. A bleack future imo.

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.

×