How do you feel? Soviets in Red Alert

[Mephisto 0]

Not meaning to start a flame war, but I'd like to know how the people who live in those countries (Russia, Libya, Cuba, etc.) feel about being portrayed as the 'bad guys' in the Red Alert games.

 

On the other side, how do you feel about the Americans (or Allies, as I should have put it) always being the 'good guys?'

 

I'm an American, but I don't care what side anyone's on. The game companies should probably think about their overseas players when they make a game a little more often.

[Mina Synd 0]

i'm fairly happy with the UK's set... Although the Sniper unit has a seriously strong accent, until something like the 1960's our army used rifles instead of assault rifles because we prefer sharpshooting over bullet count. It was said in WW2 that an English infantryman with a Lee-Enfield sounded like a he had a machinegun in battle because they were so highly trained with the weapon they could produce a rate of fire too impossibly fast to be rifle fire. Though saying that it doesn't say much for our lil sniper unit does it? sure it's a sniper rifle an not a standard rifle but he takes forever to reload (guess it's fair for unit play)

 

the only thing that did pee me off about the game was the harrier jump jets... who created them? not the koreans that's for sure. it was us! and the americans took a load in the 'nam and converted/improved them...

So really it would make more sense for the UK or US to have them... but i guess since the US does have the best paras the Koreans have gotta have something

I dunno if we're technically good guys but we are genuinely known as the peacekeepers in the EU because we agree to anything and try to be heroes... like america but more tame and under the UN/NATO banner ^^;

[Guest MadBadger]

but i do belive that the south korean airforce has a large number of suped up harriers thou. Just cos we made em dosnt mean we have the best ones.

[Luk3us 63]

Its fiction... I doubt anyone is going to get overly offended just because their country is the "bad guys"...

[Mr_Lee_ 0]

I could now delev into the philisopical 'what is good and bad' debate here but im not going to - the bad guys are who you make them to be - you may see the USA as bad for wanting to impose liberty or the russians as bad for wanting to rule everything - its a matter of perspective.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

I always favored the Soviets in gameplay. If you think about it, they are the real underdogs in the missions and in MP. The Allies have the surest advantage over bot hthe Soviets and Yuri. Prism tanks, Towers, Black Eagles, Battle Fortresses, GGI's, ACs, c'mon, the game is a little unbalanced towards the Allies.

 

Now in RA1, things were different. Aside from the Allied Navy, the Soviets ruled everywhere. Even for Allied destroyers to get in bombardment range they would have to risk Tesla Coils. The cruiser was the only behemoth the allies had that could efferotlessly waste Soviet hardware. Until the MiGs showed up.

That game was actually balanced. While the Soviets had the firepower, it took time to mass it, and it was expensive. The Allied had the speed and the stealth, as well as the GPS and the lone hero unit until CS and AfM. ANd the Allies pretty much pwned the water ways. To counter, the Soviets ruled the skies. What ever happend to the Soviets Air supperiority in RA2?? You'd think if they were planning to take on the US (superpower) Britian (beat htem last time) and Korea (Black Eagles) they would put some consideration to a decent Airforce. Although their naval upgrades are somewhat better than their RA1 fleets, the Allies have also upgraded their navy. So the Soviets really havent overcome any short comings since RA1, while the Allies have covered their weaknesses quite well. The Allies now have Air Supperiority, their Navy can still whip up on the Soviets, the BFs and GGIs can handle just about any amount of Soviet armor, and the Prism twoers make a nice counter to Tesla Coils.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

But who the hell doesn't have Destroyers around his Cruisers?

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Me :oops:

 

still, it costs a lot less on MiGs to attack successfully than it does on enough destroyers to defend successfully.

[BWare 0]

I could now delev into the philisopical 'what is good and bad' debate here but im not going to - the bad guys are who you make them to be - you may see the USA as bad for wanting to impose liberty or the russians as bad for wanting to rule everything - its a matter of perspective.

Well that relativistic perspective is all well and good, but one side slaughered tens of millions of their own citizens. The good vs evil thing seems pretty damn obvious to me. And what's this about "imposing" liberty? :roll:

I'm sorry, but in this case it is not a simple matter of perspective.