Messages posted by: PouPouJuve

Thanks 2POC for supporting the community.
A shame Feasel has to go too.

Yeah it is a gimmick now.

dky.tehkingd.u wrote:Generals 2, with better story this time, plz.

I support this. I like General's general gameplay.

Just visit the official CnC facebook page and stare at the profile picture to retrieve the secret code.

The AI may be the place they spent the most time on, since it sounds radically different. I hope it works.

I suppose EALA wanted to have that kind of leveling system, since they mentioned customizable armies initially, but ran out of time so we have to make do with what we have now.

CommanderT wrote:i agree with valdez. the changes for the most part isnt the problem. its the fact that its implemented really badly which makes c&c4 awful

Agreed.

It seems that the game design is not carefully thought out in the first place.

We gained:
5v5 gameplay(Good for a building a healthy multi-player community assuming the game is good)
Faster action than before(Good, if it still involves strategic thought)
New multi-player system that is more stable than Gamespy's(Good job)
Classes to encourage teamwork(Again, good if executed properly)

Thus innovation is not bad. However the end result is:
-A game with weird counters. I know game balance is important but having railguns and commandos do so little damage to units that they are not direct counters of is poor. More thoughts should have been put into this area. Too bad EALA decided to take the easy way out.
-Only one gameplay type. Due to the counter system, commando missions are no longer possible as well.
-As many have noted, most of the games are just spam wars with no strategic depth. Everyone just spam counters.
-Horrible graphics

Put together, the innovation does not seem to enhance gameplay. Then we check what CnC characteristics were lost on the way:
-Infantry can no longer be crushed since they form a huge proportion of the Defense Class forces
-Commandos no longer command the fear they generated in CnC3/RA3 as explained earlier
-Titans can now shoot air lol
-Localised Ion storms(which developers claim omg it is powerful but looks laughable to me)

I don't bother talking about things like population caps and harvesting because they are necessary for the new mechanics to function. Even with these concessions, the game fails in most ways, without achieving any of the aims of innovation. The end result is a CnC RTS that has almost no CnC elements, but worse still, is probably too shallow to even be called a RTS/RTT. Then we hear about the small number of single-player missions for an epic conclusion to the storyline. When Feasel(I think) said that the SAGE engine will not be used after RA3 and it appeared again in CnC4, alarm bells should have sounded. There was probably no time to properly think of the game design and it showed.

Is anyone playing MEC2 multiplayer?

Voted for The Nameless Mod, sorry.

I will like to see if there are any good CnC4 games at all.

EA_Apoc wrote:Valdez, I disagree in that we as developers and a community manager, hehe, are only accountable to the Executive Producer and thus upper EA management.

That is far from the truth and how we operate.

We are absolutely in right to be held accountable by you, our fans, otherwise, we're just making a game for ourselves and nobody else which is not an attitude we've ever intented to convey.

That said, much in the same way as I am trying to plan my wedding with my fiance, its about finding that "balance" of what two people, two parties, a fan-base and developer, etc...want.

As developers we are the painters, the Picasso of our games no doubt. But wherein Picasso painted whatever the hell he liked with no remorse or care for his followers, as game makers, just because we are artists doesn't mean we can or will do that as well.

C&C 4 has been a labor of love to this development team, and while it oozes with unique concepts that stray away from the typical C&C formula, the game at its heart when you get beyond tiberium harvesting and traditional base building, is the C&C fast-paced aggressive action with tank-*** blowing **** up.

I agree with many fans in that in a perfect world for the hardcore, C&C 4 should be as traditional as any past C&C game. But I think in consideration of the rest of our audience, we can't simply mix the same formula with every game. Your audience, your critics, you only get so many "passes" like that and with C&C 3 that was our big "C&C is back" party, Red Alert 3 we got criticized for not altering the formula much if at all, so with C&C 4, its important we take some risks in the formula, while still aiming to please our core fan-base.

So many units in C&C 4 are throwbacks to old C&C games, the look of tiberium veins and flora is what people cried for in C&C 3, the tying up the fiction in the tiberium saga will please many, live action FMV's still there, heart pounding intense action still there...and different forms of tiberium harvesting (crystal mechanic) and base building (defense class) are there...

These thread types have been popping up since we first announced C&C 4. While I understand, I think anyone unconvinced should go play the Beta, formulate your opinion, and then take a dig back. You might be surprised, you might not be, but looking at C&C 4 for what it is, instead of what it is not, is still the most important thing I can say to C&C fans.

Different is not bad, its just a matter of is the game fun to you.

-APOC

Certainly the developers have the right to innovate and I am happy they did with CnC4. However I wonder if the developers had gotten the right feedback. While review sites lament RA3 for sticking to the formula, most of the complaints I heard from friends are about over-powered units, over-cheesiness and rather bland single player missions. Game reviewers and the common folk who play it can have vastly different opinions. CnC3 might be the big come-back party but it suffers from bland missions(again!), grotesque music and shockingly poor FMVs which used to be hallmarks of the series. It did improve on strategic gameplay over pre-Generals games with expansion vehicles, unit abilities and support powers but the lack of support and patches killed its multiplayer potential. It didn't perform well with regards to both the traditional CnC crowd and the competitive gaming scene. So I really question if it is the "big come-back".

CnC4 is rather fun but as many have noted, there is questionable depth. I sometimes wonder if imperfect execution of good ideas is a trademark of EALA studio(battlecast viewer and co-op campaigns are other examples). As for the Tiberium stuff, in my opinion they do not matter at all. It is not that I do not want them but rather, their inclusion is merely cosmetic. Compared to whole-map ion storms that ground air units, Tiberium monoliths that can be destroyed, explosive blue Tiberium, we now have localised ion-storms that look puny, Tiberium monoliths that are even bigger than before except that they are just obstacles on the battlefield, mutants nobody ever bothered to build and visceroids which have pathetic scare factor. I want to interact with these Tiberium elements, not marvel at their nice shape and effects. I have not seen the role Tiberium flora or veins plays in CnC4 and I hope they are not "useless" as observed in recent efforts to "accommodate" the fans. Of course, almost no one considers having a defense class that can construct a few defenses as constituting a base.

Last words:
Different is indeed not bad, but if there is no tactic or strategy involved in a RTT/RTS, there is no reason to call it as such. If things are not done properly, no amount of innovation will produce a good game. Also, it is nice to include favourites from old CnC games but please include them in meaningful ways.

Counter system is bad and unintuitive. Powerful weapons in previous games are only good against direct counters instead of all units now. I wonder what is the use of the upgrades too, since everyone just spam units so things like increased weapon range are useless.

I think EA does listen, but it somehow always provides the wrong solutions.

If you live in Taiwan and wants to pre-order the game to get into the beta, then you may be out of luck. I live in another Asian country and cannot get in through this method. I got in through the gamespot give-away instead.

CommanderT wrote:

jemsuper wrote:but why??

what the marketing department think casual players need, apparently to them casual gamers are brain dead lol

I doubt the developers are so dumb, especially since they are gamers and love the series.

Popular Platforms

Popular Genres

EA.com

Help