I was looking at GS score of Tiberium wars...9.0, please. Now if RA3 is anywhere near the same style and qauilty I must not purchase the game. I beleive it is offensive to make a game that does not stay true to the orginal. the old C&C series was simple ,grity and, quite wonderful. I played Tiberium wars and was drawn into the world that i once loved but it was short lived. I do not get impressed with lazres and lights and I felt that was all this game was. I will cross my fingers that this game is true to its name.
I'm sort of with you on this. I mean, RA seems to be entering too far into the space age instead of just being about Military etc. I really don't think this is going to be innovative somehow. Its EA afterall.
I wouldn't count on it staying true to its routes..I'm pretty sure its completely new designerscrazymaghie123
It still looks to be in the same spirit, from what I've seen of gameplay and the FMV's. Speaking specifically on the FMVs, personally I think that they captured the tackiness and cheesiness that the old RA titles did so well.
Having played the beta, I would say that it is a modernized version of an old-school style RTS. You don't have squads or cover or anything, but there's a large emphasis on micro and correct unit usage and such, much more so than your economy.The factions have a great amount of diversity and are each fun in their own way.
The end result is a somewhat simpler, but VERY fun RTS.
Having played the beta, I would say that it is a modernized version of an old-school style RTS. You don't have squads or cover or anything, but there's a large emphasis on micro and correct unit usage and such, much more so than your economy.The factions have a great amount of diversity and are each fun in their own way.
The end result is a somewhat simpler, but VERY fun RTS.
AlternatingCaps
To be fair I don't see what squads or cover will bring to the game. Most units are not the type that would benefit from cover and squads would remove a lot of the micro and the strategy that goes along with it.
[QUOTE="crazymaghie123"]I wouldn't count on it staying true to its routes..I'm pretty sure its completely new designersG013M
It still looks to be in the same spirit, from what I've seen of gameplay and the FMV's. Speaking specifically on the FMVs, personally I think that they captured the tackiness and cheesiness that the old RA titles did so well.
yeah it seems to be staying somewhat true, but it is progressing. to modern times and beyond, but it still has the alternate WW2 universe from before.
imo, it looks to be the most innovative, daring, and technologically advanced project in the decade old series. but knowing what Red Alert is all about, the innovation probably isn't going to be ground-breaking. as a matter of fact, i think RTS is a very old genre that leaves very little room for innovation.
tho in comparison, it's definitely more innovative than certain title that only thrives on hype and fan-fare. ;)
[QUOTE="crazymaghie123"]I wouldn't count on it staying true to its routes..I'm pretty sure its completely new designersG013M
It still looks to be in the same spirit, from what I've seen of gameplay and the FMV's. Speaking specifically on the FMVs, personally I think that they captured the tackiness and cheesiness that the old RA titles did so well.
Agreed. But to answer the OP's question, staying true to it's roots means it will NOT be innovative.
why does everything have to be ground breaking. Idont mind an updated look, some new elements - not too far from the orginal and a good story and fun gameplay.
why does everything have to be ground breaking. Idont mind an updated look, some new elements - not too far from the orginal and a good story and fun gameplay.kmalyan
thank you thats teh way i look at it. RA seems to be RA and thats enough for me, new units and new round.. oh yea bring it on.
I am a 1st day buyer for sure, for several reasons.
For one, the game returns to the red alert style. A bit cartoony, some wacky units and stuff, but at the same time really cool and really fun, and while it is going to look beautiful, I think its going to keep its roots better than you'd expect.
The only iffy thing for me is the whole "Einstein is dead" thing. Definately an interesting plot, but the new superweapons just dont look as stunning.
The only iffy thing for me is the whole "Einstein is dead" thing. Definately an interesting plot, but the new superweapons just dont look as stunning.
falconclan
From what I've seen of the plot, it's fairly similar to the Red Alert 1 plot, with Einstein going back in time to prevent World War II with Germany, but instead the Soviets rose to power in the new parallel universe created.
From what I saw in tiberium wars I hope this game is more than smoke and mirrors. For everyone saying the game does not need to be innovative, you are wrong. I would actually rather see an exact replica only updated....something like Dune 2000.
I can see that some people may be turned off by the whole "space age" look and feel. They kinda just threw this game in our face without a proper introduction.
I think they went overboard with the art style, I find the ore trucks and the soviet base hideously revolting (I had to keep a bucket by my side during the beta in case I caught a glance at either for too long)
Tib Wars was not a 9.0 game, despite the presence of Kane as Joe Kucan, I thought it was probably the worst of all the cnc games (and I've only missed out on firestorm for tib sun)
But you know I'm a sucker for 3 things, 1 - FMV with cheesy scenes, 2 - Hellmarch and 3 - Tim Curry.
I think they went overboard with the art style, I find the ore trucks and the soviet base hideously revolting (I had to keep a bucket by my side during the beta in case I caught a glance at either for too long)
Tib Wars was not a 9.0 game, despite the presence of Kane as Joe Kucan, I thought it was probably the worst of all the cnc games (and I've only missed out on firestorm for tib sun)
But you know I'm a sucker for 3 things, 1 - FMV with cheesy scenes, 2 - Hellmarch and 3 - Tim Curry.
I hear RA 3 has all of the above.
nutcrackr
I have to say i agree with this. Although i think the RA series is supposed to be Over-the-top - with thier units and buildings, also the story, but the art style did go overboard, a little more than a tad i think. But i think thats the whole point of it being 'C&C's crazy cousin'. I also will be keeping the bucket handy, but i'm a fan, and i'm sure it won't disappoint.
Aside from the new units and updated graphics it's pretty much the same a old RTS. As for being innovative, being able to build out on the water does change things up a bit without messing with the tried and true C&C gameplay.
I actually liked generals alot. It did differ from the norm but I think that was why I liked.Which goes back to my main point that they can still make the same game just be a bit more innovative and give the gamer the new addiction that old C&C did. I thought it was neat picking a different general to play as.
I actually liked generals alot. It did differ from the norm but I think that was why I liked.Which goes back to my main point that they can still make the same game just be a bit more innovative and give the gamer the new addiction that old C&C did. I thought it was neat picking a different general to play as.jasoncesario
it was not the gameplay of generals that i didnt like, it was fine, i liked it... it was the setting, the universe, it felt like watered down C&C - Red Alert mixed, but tried to be made more serious... the mood just wasnt there, but i do have to say if they made it a C&C shadow game, just with a better setting and mood... generals would of been wonderful for me.
Log in to comment