New RA3 Details & Developer Interview

[Pyrodaimon 0]

How on earth is the RTS genre or even C&C as a franchise supposed to evolve if everything always stays the same?

Just because monkeys evolved into humans doesn't mean they grew wings, tentacles and poisonous stings. We homo sapiens sapiens still retain a primate-like frame.

 

Anyhow, when I read that there would be no Prism I was . When I read 'no nukes' I was . And that there's no ore I'm

 

What's next? No Iron Curtain? No Chronosphere?

[Julbri 0]

We moan at EA for chucking out endless clones of the same game year after year, yet when they actually use some form of innovation or make a whole load of changes people say they don't like it!? Some people need to decide what they want. It may look Red Alert 2 3D, but in all honesty, that's the last thing I want it to play like.

 

i have got to agree with this- whats wrong with a little change? i can live without ore, prism or even nukes in the game if it means they can put in something better!

[ShadowKeriphin 0]

Why is it poorly written? Its all perfectly simple:

 

Linear means that there wont be any choices in mission selection or -order. If you complete a mission, youll go right to the next one, without a world map with several selectable missions, right to the next one, and so forth. Thus this point wasnt referring to mission design, strategical depth or canonical surprises, but on how youre going to proceed from mission a to mission b. Example: In GTA3, you had multiple sources providing you with tasks, and you could choose the order of them (Like first youll take C, then A, then . But in a game like Max Payne 2 for instance, youre going from level to level without the game ever letting you decide which level to complete first (A-->B-->C).

 

And regarding FMVs: No, it doesnt translate to poor story and CGI-only. They simply realized that TW FMVs contained almost exclusively pointless talking, and they want to cut that back. That doesnt mean that there wont be any dialogue, just that it wont be that extensive.

 

Pointless talking - I thought of it as character and story development. Yeah RA2's screenplay wasn't as good as RA1 but I think there are certain things that make C&C - C&C. These aspects should come first! Yeah - superweapons, units, sides, that is all their own and above all this is EA's game now and I will look forward to it anyway, but if you give the title a number and label it as a story in a series then it should keep some similar basics! I mean hell! the Ion Cannon hasn't died yet! but yes as I said earlier nukes are well over used but Nukes are Russia! and Communism! You can't honestly think Communism with out thinking Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Vietnam with at least tying Nuclear Weapons in with them - it's as solid as the AK-47. OK ok anyway.

 

C&C having a linear story? anything C&C? what - I guess they just want it to flow from one mission to the other - what fun is that? what depth of choice and consequence!? It just annoys me that simplicity sells. No choosing where to attack whether it has the same out come or not? I guess we will be bumped down the chain of command and power as to just do what we are told. I just think Choice has always been crucial in C&C.

 

Ore has been there in the beginning - but as a gameplay value - resource gathering can get old as it is very old - westwood created that aspect in RTS. I really like DOW's idea of flag/area control for res - that could make very interesting game play. Course res can be brought about by say - patriotism and propaganda!

 

Now in reference to GTA3 and Max Payne 1/2: GTA3 had a general story with missions that you could do at anytime but if you failed some or completed others it changed the gameplay and the story wasn't very deep. Max Payne's story was rather deep and you played it as though you were watching a movie hence the lack of mission choice.

 

MP1/2: Pure Story - No Mission Choice -like a movie

GTA3+: Shallow Story - Mission Choice

C&C-TD-RA-TS-RA2-TW: Story and Mission Choice - Why break the chains? Why be like Generals?

No Mission Choice and Non-indepth story, to me that just means multi-player/skirmish only.

[rEdaSbLood 1]

well res in past CNC have been territorial control just on a more micro level...i mean you still had to defend your tib/ore fields..

 

im all for change, i can handle no nukes, no prisms i dont like but that just opinion...no ore fields is excusable but i do see it as a core element for RA games, i mean why could they not just put the water resources alongside ORE fields giving two options?

 

i did not see the concept art for the new faction so i apologize for speaking out of ignorance, its just that i fail to see how anime styles fit into the RA universe..

 

BY ALL MEANS im not down on the game. im actually VERY excited. the majority of info about the game so far has made me eager and hopeful :lol: .....but SARACEN you of all people should understand the importance of community feedback, and after all not too long ago you were a bit disappointed with what EA had distributed as a 'CNC' game (cnc3)...

[TheRoadToDawn 0]

im wondering about the whole resources thing...no ore fields?and i also dont like the aime stuff..

 

I agree. This is not looking original C&C material at all. A linear campaign, screwing with the resources (reminds me of generals completely), the only thing i like is the upcoming catfights. lol.

 

Just because monkeys evolved into humans doesn't mean they grew wings, tentacles and poisonous stings. We homo sapiens sapiens still retain a primate-like frame.

 

Anyhow, when I read that there would be no Prism I was . When I read 'no nukes' I was . And that there's no ore I'm

 

What's next? No Iron Curtain? No Chronosphere?

 

Agreed And WHY prefilm FMVS!

 

Im not wanting to dis RA3, but for its sake, keep to the format on how EA made C&C3.

 

But for now, I wait for the community summit and I hope that the fan representatives chosen for the event share the concerns of the community and push for what needs to be changed.

Edited March 14, 2008 by TheRoadToDawn

[Renamon 0]

Isn't this the new resource? If not then wtf is it?

 

[Overcow 0]

Thats probobly just a newly destroyed building.

[Inferno 22]

An underwater fortress Nah, I have no idea.

[Gben 20]

well it's a bit hard to see... but I'm guessing it's eye candy. It could also be the remnants of an allied destryoyed building... which will dissapear in a few secs.

[TheRoadToDawn 0]

Good detail with the water effects. I do not mind if the units are animated, but i still dont like the resource idea.

 

The firing action is lookn good.

 

To me that looks like the reminants of a battleship. look at the whole area underwater. Cannot explain the stairs, so it could be a structure

[hagren 0]

Pointless talking - I thought of it as character and story development. Yeah RA2's screenplay wasn't as good as RA1 but I think there are certain things that make C&C - C&C. These aspects should come first! Yeah - superweapons, units, sides, that is all their own and above all this is EA's game now and I will look forward to it anyway, but if you give the title a number and label it as a story in a series then it should keep some similar basics! I mean hell! the Ion Cannon hasn't died yet! but yes as I said earlier nukes are well over used but Nukes are Russia! and Communism! You can't honestly think Communism with out thinking Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, and Vietnam with at least tying Nuclear Weapons in with them - it's as solid as the AK-47. OK ok anyway.

 

C&C having a linear story? anything C&C? what - I guess they just want it to flow from one mission to the other - what fun is that? what depth of choice and consequence!? It just annoys me that simplicity sells. No choosing where to attack whether it has the same out come or not? I guess we will be bumped down the chain of command and power as to just do what we are told. I just think Choice has always been crucial in C&C.

 

Ore has been there in the beginning - but as a gameplay value - resource gathering can get old as it is very old - westwood created that aspect in RTS. I really like DOW's idea of flag/area control for res - that could make very interesting game play. Course res can be brought about by say - patriotism and propaganda!

 

Now in reference to GTA3 and Max Payne 1/2: GTA3 had a general story with missions that you could do at anytime but if you failed some or completed others it changed the gameplay and the story wasn't very deep. Max Payne's story was rather deep and you played it as though you were watching a movie hence the lack of mission choice.

 

MP1/2: Pure Story - No Mission Choice -like a movie

GTA3+: Shallow Story - Mission Choice

C&C-TD-RA-TS-RA2-TW: Story and Mission Choice - Why break the chains? Why be like Generals?

No Mission Choice and Non-indepth story, to me that just means multi-player/skirmish only.

Wow, you are misinterpreting what I'm saying constantly

 

With pointless talking, I mean exactly that. Pointless talking. Character or canon development is not pointless. What they tried to express is, that in TW, there was almost exclusively talking, while it was not well-written , which rendered it boring. Now they want to make it more exciting. So the comparison wasnt made with RA2 in mind.

 

Uhm yeah. Linear. Like RA2. FMV-Loading Screen-Mission-FMV-Loading screen-mission-FMV...This didnt focus on strategic choices, only mission preference choices.

 

And with the GTA3/Max payne comparison I wasnt referring to story quality, but the difference between linearity and non-linearity for demonstratic purposes.