The EA RTS Philosophy

[fox34343 1]

i found this interview on gamespy, its an interview with Louis Castle the co-founder (with partner Brett Sperry) of Westwood Studios.

 

for the full interview click follow the link http://pc.gamespy.com/articles/602/602122p1.html

 

this part i found interesting, read the last line.

 

GameSpy: Command & Conquer: Generals was a distinct departure from the story-driven gameplay of the previous games. Is this the new direction for the franchise, or should we expect to see a return to previous styles in upcoming Red Alert and Command & Conquer games?

 

Louis Castle: We are dedicated to Command & Conquer products, and with each one we will look to make sure and match the most appropriate fiction to the gameplay benefits we feel the market will be most excited about. We are currently working on something new -- it's in the early stages of concept development -- and we are currently considering our many options. It's not unusual during the genesis of a game to start leaning towards one concept but then find that the gameplay lends itself to something else -- we've already taken the concept in a new and exciting direction that is vastly different than what we initially proposed. Whatever we do, though, I can promise that we will be faithful to the story presentation set in previous products and we hope to build upon that fiction.

[Waraddict 0]

- Immediacy and ease of use - any player should be able to pick it up and play.

 

In other words, make the game piss easy...

 

-High audio/visual entertainment value - television and film are our competition, not other games. We are competing for entertainment time and attention.

 

And that's why there was no story in C&C right? or are you talking about how graphics are so overated these days?

 

Deep and interconnected functionality - even the most experienced player should find new and interesting ways to combine units and strategies to defeat the computer or other players.

 

That's one thing I liked RA2 for, compared to RA2, Generals had hardly any of this, and if you could continue to find new and interesting strategies, what's the point in them when the game is piss easy and you can pull a win by a no-brainer strat?

 

Personally, these points do not seems at all to be anywhere along the possible goals the original C&Cs had which made the franchise popular in the first place.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

RA2 does have a near endlees poosibily of available strategies, however, a much better challenge would be TS. But the Ai was never any good until Generals brutal AI, and even that gets old after half a skirmish.

 

BTW the article is now on the front page (in case you didnt notice) :block:

[fox34343 1]

awwwwww look at the timing i had it at least an hour befor.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Look on the bright side, gamespy didnt say anything until today (April 8, 2005)

[Saracen 16]

An RTS that does not allow you to "Tank Rush" and does not include pop caps to prevent this will be onto a sure fire winner.

 

What we need is a total War & C&C feel all mixed in with a touch of something original and special and here will be the perfect RTS. AI will be what you select, not attacks in greater numbers as the difficulty level rises. etc.

 

A "C&C: Total War" game would be the best thing since Tiberian Dawn

[Arificial 0]

Well you know my friends, if Westwood knew it's climaticism to fame, Westwood never would have sold itself. But, since it did, almost all of the games were a huge hit, except the first on created, that was a flop because the plot wasn't really there. I mean, people who payed attention to the storyline and the climatics, they would see it, but most people just buy these games because they want to see carnage and destruction . But I have been a HUGE fan since it came out, A LONG, LONG, TIME AGO.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Well you know my friends, if Westwood knew it's climaticism to fame, Westwood never would have sold itself. But, since it did, almost all of the games were a huge hit, except the first on created, that was a flop because the plot wasn't really there. I mean, people who payed attention to the storyline and the climatics, they would see it, but most people just buy these games because they want to see carnage and destruction . But I have been a HUGE fan since it came out, A LONG, LONG, TIME AGO.

 

IN A GALAXY FAR AWAY.... :wink:

 

I dont think Westwood sold themselves, EA just went in and bought them. Dont know exectly how it all works, but whatever. Its messed up.

 

C&C Total War would be very cool or a C&C Rise of Nations with the advancement through the ages and the new technology. C&C Chronicles, the Total History form that day in Trinity, New Mexico to the final confontation in TT. All documented in one game. (that would be what, 23+ disks? Allowing for RA3 and TT.)