[Stunaep]

Originally posted by mikhael



Not only did Westwood shamelessly milk the wallets of the gullible, they did it in the most obscene way. They did what one EA Sports exec called 'slap new makeup on the old whore and send her out again'. They failed to innovate in any way once they found the formula. Say what you want about that abyssmal earth2150 (or whatever it was), at least it added pretty 3d explosions.  I don't mind C&C:Renegade. You know why? Its different. Its something fresh for the game universe, even if it isn't fresh for gaming. It went in a new direction. For that, I applaud them.

Feh. Good riddance if they go.

Agreed. C&C Renegade is different. I also await big things from C&C: Generals. After looking at the preview it looks like it's going to be the thing that Emperor: Battle for Dune should have been.

I guess Westwood finally realised (possibly after looking at the sales numbers for E:BFD, which were bad for Westwoods usual) that the basic Dune2 formula doesn't sell anymore.

I'm glad the realised that.

[Ace]

Hears disrespect of Warcraft, Ace's ears start to melt
Noooo! mikhael is an unbeliever! Cleanse him with the fury of Warcraft and Master of Orion! (You dis on Warcraft, you're dissin' on MOO as they go hand in hand... time to Stellar Convert your religion... )

Anyhow, I do agree that Westwood's games seem to be simply a rehash of Dune 2. The original Command and Conquer I enjoyed, Red Alert was fun but not that original, and the later ones I never bothered with past the demos. Renegade might not bring anything new to the world of FPS games, but it is fun and a good new direction for the guys.

BTW Someone go to Warpstorm, yell that we need a :StellarConverter: smiley!

[NeoHunter]

Since Starcraft came out, I have stopped playing Command and Conquer games. However, I am thinking of trying Command and Conquer Renegade.

[Nico]

reall, there's more new stuff between tiberian sun and tib danw than there is between FS1 and FS2 (or iwar1 and 2 ) Funny how you attack gamesq you don't like, and won't say anything about the ones you love.
If there's no plot in tib dawn or sun, i agree to eat my keyboard.
Ooooh sure there's no laien that can surf on novas, create their own universe or spawn a planet out of their ***,  agreed. nah, you it's a matter of geopolitics (well tib dawn, coz obviously TS is different), genetic manilupaltions, misinformation etc etc etc.
All your critics are based on your personal tastes, and you deny the game stuff it does have, and THAT is what pisses me off.
Comparing an EA sport game (that changes only the textures and the names of the sportmen between each edition) and comparing, say dune2k and dune emperor. that's... just play the games once, do you?
Oh well never mind.

[Setekh]

Originally posted by NeoHunter
Since Starcraft came out, I have stopped playing Command and Conquer games. However, I am thinking of trying Command and Conquer Renegade.

My sentiments precisely.

[Stunaep]

Haven't played any Blizzard strategy games, but from what I've heard here, it looks, like I should try.

[Stryke 9]

Unless you have access to any actually GOOD games... I'd recommend TA for starts.

[Thorn]

The Blizzard games were good right up to Starcraft....
I've been playing the WC3 beta, and, well, all it is is WC2 in 3D with a few new races...
And its bloody hard to tell whats going on when units are fighting...

[Zeronet]

Have you thought about the reason the C&C games are similar? Its because they got it right the first time, and thus tweak the games etc. They kept 2d because it worked best at the time, only now are they going 3d because the computers can handle richer 3d environments.

[CP5670]

I think TA, with all of the mods and everything out there, is still the best RTS game out there today. It is basically what Tiberian Sun should have been; only it was released an year before that.

I don't really know why everyone liked SC that much; it was not too bad but nothing special (just like Half-Life in that way) and really just another RTS game. It was pretty good, but the fun factor, interface and the underlying complexity of the game could not match TA's IMHO.

Have you thought about the reason the C&C games are similar? Its because they got it right the first time, and thus tweak the games etc. They kept 2d because it worked best at the time, only now are they going 3d because the computers can handle richer 3d environments.

The main thing I have liked about the C&C games is that both tank rush and full-scale coordinated attacks work equally well, lending the game to different styles of play. (TA is the only non-C&C game that does this well) The thing is that, just because they got it right the first time, does not mean that it can be made better, and the formula has to improved to keep up with the changing times. One problem with TS was that if it was released about two years before it actually was, it would have been a fantastic game and a worthy successor to the C&C franchise. They kept it in development for too long without paying attention to what other games had accomplished in that time, so the game did not turn out so great in comparison to the others. Red Alert 2's development time was pretty good, but TS had set the developers back so far that even it came out too late.

[Stunaep]

Sorry, for not being informed, but TA?

[Stunaep]

Oh, Total Annihilation. I really need to sleep.

[Ryx]

Apparently TA2's  in development.

Story @ computer & video games

go here for more
http://www.planetannihilation.com

[LtNarol]

one question: how would you improve a game engine like TS?  Blizzard did the same thing between its warcraft series and starcraft.  And how was what they did steeling?  if people like the game they buy it, if they dont like it they dont buy it.  How many people just go out and buy a game just because its there?  Close to none, anyone with half a brain would first check what its about and if its worth buying; anyone too dumb to do this is just plain dumb and its not Westwood's job or anyone's to save the idiotic from themselves.

[CP5670]

The Warcraft and Starcraft games suffered from the same problem (lack of anything really new, or even a combination of all the best traits from other games), but they were marketed aggressively and recieved exceptional support, which allowed the games to do very well in terms of popularity. People can choose to buy or not buy the games, but that will not change the fact that they are mediocre in comparison to others.

[Stryke 9]

StarCraft's main selling point was that they'd polished what they had to the point where it hurt your eyes to look at it. WarCraft's was that at the time the only good strat games were little indie bits done by some progger in his spare time and known to maybe 100 people.

[Nico]

Originally posted by CP5670
The Warcraft and Starcraft games suffered from the same problem (lack of anything really new, or even a combination of all the best traits from other games), but they were marketed aggressively and recieved exceptional support, which allowed the games to do very well in terms of popularity. People can choose to buy or not buy the games, but that will not change the fact that they are mediocre in comparison to others.

pff. do you buy a game coz it was heavily marketed? I sure don't.
i'll buy Warcraft3, not coz it has a good support, but coz it's fun.
All you guys around forget that, Warcraft, c&C, etc etc etc, they all sell well coz they're fun; coz you actually enjoy playing them.
If TA sold well, it's not coz you could queue units construction , it's coz it was fun. Bah, and if you're seeking for inovations, you obvioulsy haven't played RA2. I don't like the RA universe much, but RA2 has a lot of cool features that I've never seen in any other RTS. And yet it's still fun.
Bah, I'm fed up about ranting for nothing.

[LtNarol]

and tiberian sun wasnt well developed? they had a very good balance of strength yet without using the same thing for both sides withonly a slightly different look, each side had a theme, the cutscenes rocked, and the expansion actually made the game better.  Best of all, it actually takes some skill unlike starcraft where all you do is mass by the numbers, a dozen carriers if you're protoss, hydralisks and mutalisks if you're zerg, and seige tanks and wraiths if you're Terran.  You cant do that in TS, you actually need to use strategy.

[CP5670]

Hey I'm not defending Starcraft - in fact, I personally think SC kind of sucks, and TS, although it wasn't great, was quite a bit better than that game - but the thing is that TS "only" became quite a good game due to its extended release date, while its precursors (particularly the first C&C) were simply stunning for their time. As I said earlier, it was a very nice game in its own right, but could not compare to its predecessors and was a bit of a letdown considering that it was the sequel to such a great series. It was a good game but not the absolute best RTS of its time, as C&C was; TA kind of took that spot for the time and Westwood should either have released its product first, or added in all the great stuff from that game along with the excellent C&C formula to make a truly innovative product.

I still had a lot of respect for Westwood however, until they started releasing so many games at around the same time, all of which were very good but none of which were truly legendary; with the announcement of this new C&C game, it is fairly evident that they are simply trying to use the C&C name to get some extra money than build a really good game.

I have played TS a lot online though and I definitely agree in that there are many good strategies required to defeat the enemy. The thing is that these days there are a lot of trainers and hacks out there and cheaters are unfortunately fairly common, and Westwood is not actively supporting the game anymore.

If TA sold well, it's not coz you could queue units construction  , it's coz it was fun. Bah, and if you're seeking for inovations, you obvioulsy haven't played RA2. I don't like the RA universe much, but RA2 has a lot of cool features that I've never seen in any other RTS. And yet it's still fun.

I don't really remember seeing anything "new" in RA2, but it was a very fun game nevertheless. Still, an absolutely perfect game has to not only be fun and addictive (most important), but also technologically advanced and should include either new innovations or a combination of all that was good in other titles. C&C got everything right; TS and RA2 got the fun part right but missed the other two, which resulted in great games but not true classics.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by venom2506
reall, there's more new stuff between tiberian sun and tib danw than there is between FS1 and FS2 (or iwar1 and 2 ) Funny how you attack gamesq you don't like, and won't say anything about the ones you love.
If there's no plot in tib dawn or sun, i agree to eat my keyboard.
Ooooh sure there's no laien that can surf on novas, create their own universe or spawn a planet out of their ***,  agreed. nah, you it's a matter of geopolitics (well tib dawn, coz obviously TS is different), genetic manilupaltions, misinformation etc etc etc.
All your critics are based on your personal tastes, and you deny the game stuff it does have, and THAT is what pisses me off.
Comparing an EA sport game (that changes only the textures and the names of the sportmen between each edition) and comparing, say dune2k and dune emperor. that's... just play the games once, do you?
Oh well never mind.

Bad Venom. Very bad. You're confusing books with video games. I don't see what the crazy ideas of Stephen Baxter or Ian Banks have to do with videogames, be they realtime 'strategy' or space sim. Lay off the alcohol.

Seriously, I believe if you search the threads, I DID attack FS2 as being a not very good successor to FS1. I never PLAYED Iwar1. It won't run on my system. Sorry. And I have to agree that most Space sims (with the exception of Iwar2) are rehashes of WingCommander1. I agree COMPLETELY. You're absolutely right, and I won't defend them.

On the other hand, other than the graphics, what was the real, game-mechanics difference between Dune2 and C&C. Not bloody much. In fact, all the C&C derivatives have been the same game--with different cutscenes and updated sprites. Joy.  Hey, its a formula that works. And its just what sports games do (minus the cutscenes). See, I did play the games, Venom. I just couldn't swallow the same stuff over and over past the third mission.

Dune2 got it right and the rest have been boring to me. Is that bad? Is that wrong? No. Its my opinion, which I was expressing. I wasn't telling you not to play them. I was expressing pleasure at the fact that WESTWOOD will have to do something NEW, Something ORIGINAL.

Could you be offended because I attack something YOU like? Sorry if I offended you, but I think that you can have the vBulletin system censor out my opinions so you won't have to be offended by them in the future.