Red Alert 3 Interview & New Screen Shots

[Sonic 296]

IGN have posted an excellent interview with Red Alert 3 executive producer Chris Corry. Not only does this interview give us some new information you also get three new screen shots as well, which may or may not have seen in some the magazine scans. Here is a sample from the interview.

 

IGN: It wouldn't be Red Alert without the live-action cutscenes. What do you have in mind?

 

Chris Corry: We really do think the live-action cinematics are a staple of the Red Alert series. We're going pretty full bore with the cinematics this time. We're going to have more than an hour of cinematics; it's almost a minimovie that we're shooting for this. We're not quite ready to talk about the cast. We've got almost the entire cast locked down, but until we actually do the cinematics shoot, which we're currently scheduled to do in mid April, we won't be talking about that. Until I've got the movie stars in their seats and doing their stuff, it doesn't feel real.

 

IGN: Where does the filming take place at? Los Angeles? Vancouver?

 

Chris Corry: It's LA. We do SAG shoots here in LA and it's actually amazing to me. Before C&C 3, I'd never been on a movie set, and that really is what these are. These are full-on movie productions. We use movie production houses, we use a real movie DP [director of photography], and of course we're using real movie talent. We put a great deal of energy and time and attention into building elaborate sets and shooting a lot of green and doing a pretty aggressive post-production schedule where we do a lot of the sort of things that you would see in a Hollywood feature.

Click here for the full interview.

[Inferno 22]

RA3 is starting to look good

[sith_wampa 6]

RA3 is starting to look good

 

Starting?

[fox34343 1]

'We think of there being two universes that reside under the Command & Conquer brand. When we think about Command & Conquer, we think about sort of a style of play. So it's fast, fun, fluid RTS gameplay.'

Two universes? he's not counting generals as a C&C universe game :lol: :lol: :lol:

Edited March 16, 2008 by Sonic

[Overcow 0]

'We think of there being two universes that reside under the Command & Conquer brand. When we think about Command & Conquer, we think about sort of a style of play. So it's fast, fun, fluid RTS gameplay.'

Two universes? he's not counting generals as a C&C universe game :lol: :lol: :lol:

That's a good thing...

[fox34343 1]

I just never thought I would hear them say it!

[Jason 0]

I hope that building grid in pic 3 is optional.

[sith_wampa 6]

I hope that building grid in pic 3 is optional.

 

It's not and why?

[Pyrodaimon 0]

Yeah, why? Grids have always been part of C&C until TW. It's a good thing they've returned. That means there's a tiny chance we'd see walls returning.

 

EDIT: why Kirovs are called Blimps? That name sucks. It sounds like some random computer onomatopoeia. Like 'boot' or 'click'.

Edited March 15, 2008 by Pyrodaimon

[rEdaSbLood 1]

it's still kind of early, no?

[Inferno 22]

Yeah, why? Grids have always been part of C&C until TW. It's a good thing they've returned. That means there's a tiny chance we'd see walls returning.

 

EDIT: why Kirovs are called Blimps? That name sucks. It sounds like some random computer onomatopoeia. Like 'boot' or 'click'.

Kirovs are not called blimps, they ARE blimps.

[Pyrodaimon 0]

Kirovs are not called blimps, they ARE blimps.

 

Still, I hope they won't have 'Blimp' in they're name. If they want to change its name, I'd prefer Kirov Warship.

[Mighty BOB! 5]

Actually Kirovs are dirigibles, not blimps.

[rEdaSbLood 1]

or even a zeppelin

[Redmond Boyle 0]

It's so sad that the soviets are attacked all the time... Why can't everyone just leave the soviets alone and let them conquer the earth?

[Luk3us 63]

haha. Yeah, wouldn't it be nice?

[Inferno 22]

Actually Kirovs are dirigibles, not blimps.

What the hell are dirigibles again?

[JahSpoR 0]

What the hell are dirigibles again?

 

It's a Kirov

[Mighty BOB! 5]

What the hell are dirigibles again?

The gas bag has a rigid body (skeleton/exoskeleton) rather than being a limp bag with a gondola attached like the Goodyear Blimp.

[hagren 0]

No. While the term "dirigibles" often is used to refer to rigid airships, the exact (though casual) name would be "Zeppelin", since "dirigibles" is a synonym for "airship" and stands as a collective term for steerable (Hence the name), buoyant aircraft, including non-rigid airships. If you want to be very very formal, Kirovs are simply rigid airships.

 

However, Bob was right about blimps. Kirovs could not qualify as them since "blimp" refers to non-rigid dirigibles.

Edited March 17, 2008 by hagren

[cnc_sage 0]

Just call it a Kirov Airship, like in RA2!! Case closed!

 

It's so sad that the soviets are attacked all the time... Why can't everyone just leave the soviets alone and let them conquer the earth?

No.

[Mighty BOB! 5]

Indeed, I had dirigible and Zeppelin backwards.

[Inferno 22]

So what's really a dirigible then? A zeppelin I've heard of, and I know that's exactly what it is (didn't even know that was an english word as well).