Why isn't C&C anywhere on the Greatest Games list?!?!

The three games that are credited with ushering in the RTS genre: Command & Conquer, StarCraft, and Total Annihilation.

Looking over the list of Greatest Games of All Time on GS, I see:

Total Annihilation.

StarCraft.

No Command & Conquer.

Why isn't it in GS's "Hall of Fame?" It kick-started the genre, and gave rise to the greatest RTS "villain" of all time: Kane.

It's far past time that this oversight was reversed. Add C&C to the Greatest Games list (or Red Alert; it, too, belongs in the "Hall Of Fame") and fix this error in oversight!!!

What hall of fame? Can you link it?

Personally, I found the C&C games to be pretty boring, I liked Red Alert but it was probably because I hadn't played many other strategy games back then. The C&C games just don't feel like strategy games, the only decision you're making is how many tanks you're going to use, yeah I know, there are other units too, I just never felt any need to use them.

It kick-started the genre

OrkHammer007

I think you got a little confused...Dune 2 is held to be the progenitor of the RTS genre on the PC. And even before C&C, there was Warcaft: Orcs and Humans.

and gave rise to the greatest RTS "villain" of all time: Kane.

what happend to hitler (company of heroes)

and gave rise to the greatest RTS "villain" of all time: Kane.

what happend to hitler (company of heroes)

ahmedkandil

Overrated.

My pick is Sarah Kerrigan from StarCraft.

@edge: http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/greatestgames/index.html

@ein: I meant, "Kick-started the genre's popularity," not the genre itself.

@ahmed: Yes, Hitler may have been a villain, but I doubt if you threw Hitler lives" in a forum signature that it would be as openly accepted as "Kane lives!"

Besides, even though CoH is a very good RTS, it needs a few more years for "cla$$ic" status... then we'll push for its inclusion as well.

hahahahaha yup. good point

No C&C on there...shocking.

I'm glad to see Doom, Quake, Grim Fandango, Double Dragon, Half Life and Phantasy Star II are on there.

[QUOTE="ahmedkandil"]

and gave rise to the greatest RTS "villain" of all time: Kane.

what happend to hitler (company of heroes)

KhanhAgE

Overrated.

My pick is Sarah Kerrigan from StarCraft.

is she considered a villain? she doesnt seem all that evil.

anyway, wow, GS hasnt added CnC yet?

TA never had much impact on the RTS genre at all. It's still a good game, though.Erlkoenig

So what? Does it need to to be one of the greatest games ever made?

Starcrafts the game that nearly hit 10 million so of course thats the model for most RTS companies.

And to add to the topic I don't think CNC deserves to bo on the greatest of all times as it really hasn't done much for the genre.

CnC has always been about casual mindless tank spam, while that maybe all good and fun for some it certainly isn't deserving of the hall of fame hence it's not there.

... it really hasn't done much for the genre.zipozal

No StarCraft. No Total Annihilation. No WarCraft. No Supreme Commander. No Dawn of War. No Homeworld. etc, etc...

[QUOTE="zipozal"]... it really hasn't done much for the genre.OrkHammer007

No StarCraft. No Total Annihilation. No WarCraft. No Supreme Commander. No Dawn of War. No Homeworld. etc, etc...

:lol: get your history right buddy, your thinking of Dune not CNC

And actually I think Warcraft was out before CNC so I think it's more then safe to say all of Blizzards RTS games would have been around with or without the CNC franchise which really didn't influence Blizzard at all, Dune 2 did yes, but not CNC

[QUOTE="zipozal"]... it really hasn't done much for the genre.OrkHammer007

No StarCraft. No Total Annihilation. No WarCraft. No Supreme Commander. No Dawn of War. No Homeworld. etc, etc...

Pffft no... Warcraft is a far older series that is more highly rated.. Dune was the creator.. Warcraft was what made it grow NOT CNC

I love it when Blizzard fans try to twist the facts:

"Far older?" Try one year for WC1 to C&C1.

"Better rated?" RA1- 9.5. C&C1 - 9.3.

WC2 - 9.3. Ditto WC3.

AND... since Dune 2 came from Westwood, who created C&C, it could definitely be argued that Blizzard needed C&C for their own success. Otherwise, they'd still be creating sequels to Rock 'n' Roll Racing.

I'm not really a CnC fan, but please people! CnC is one of the most important RTS games ever, who cares if Warcraft came out before, CnC is still playable today, while Warcraft with it's four unit selection limit, crappy pathfinding, and overly complicated way of giving orders really isn't. ( That's atleast my experience, feel free to disagreee :) ) CnC feels far more like a modern RTS. I'd think that speaks in favour of CnC being more important in the development of modern RTS games. Tank Rush anyone?

Blizzards defining impact on the RTS genre was Warcraft 2 more than 1.

The CnC series is hugely important, and really should have a place in the Hall of Fame.

And no, Dune2 wasn't the first RTS ever.. Not really :P

AND... since Dune 2 came from Westwood, who created C&C, it could definitely be argued that Blizzard needed C&C for their own success. Otherwise, they'd still be creating sequels to Rock 'n' Roll Racing.

OrkHammer007

You seem to not be drawing connections based on your own posts. Blizzard did not need C&C for their success. Blizzard only needed Dune 2 to see that there was a market for RTS games (and, yes, Dune 2 was the first marketable RTS that garnered popular acclaim on the PC). And seeing that Warcraft 2 came out 3 months after C&C, I would hardly say that C&C was the driving factor in Bliz's developing a sequel to Warcraft: Orcs and Humans.

I do agree that C&C should be up there with the Greatest Games of all time. While it was Dune II that defined the genre in 1992, giving us what needed to be in an RTS game, I think it was C&C (yes, AND Warcraft) that REFINED the genre after Dune II started it - C&C took what Dune had and made it more workable and useable.

In a sense, C&C defined that particular "half" of the RTS genre - I'm talking about the gameplay here ... the C&C gameplay involving the MCV-esque way of doing things, as opposed to the Warcraft-style worker-unit based gameplay. Most mainstream RTSs are based on one system or the other, (but of course there are exceptions that work just as well).

The fact that BOTH series are being talked about on this thread should tell us all something shouldn't it - they were the 2 pillars of RTS gaming, so they should both get a mention on GS's list. Warcraft II and Starcraft are both on there, and have been for some time. So why not that other RTS franchise ... C&C?

Final note - admittedly, the only 2 C&Cs that actually would deserve to be there are the original, and/or Red Alert 1, since those were the defining C&C games that brought something new to the genre.

Yes, Company of Heroes will be a classic; however, it's only a year old. It's full impact on the genre is as-yet unrealized.

The first C&C is well over a decade old (first released August 31st, 1995); it's impact is measurable and tangible.

C&C first, then CoH (in fact, when you push to have it included, I'll make sure that I support it 100%).

CNC needs to be there or the list is a joke.

there were other RTS games before CNC in 95, but CNC made the RTS genre POPULAR like never before, it really was the groundbreaking RTS game.

Well why do you think sherlock lol

RTS is so 1998

First off, C&C 3 is crap, the worst C&C game yet. Well atleast the most bugged C&C game yet. As for C&C, TD or TS should of been there. And GS ratings are horrible.

I think Krishmaj said it right in his post

There's a limit to the number of games on the list ...bob9999999999

Let's not make this "which C&C is better," please; let's just focus on getting C&C in the Greatest Games list.

Thank you.

^^^Define "great."

If great means, "fun," C&C was definitly fun

If great means "highly-rated," "critically-acclaimed," etc. C&C was all of those (I refer you to Metacritic for Exhibit A).

If "great" means "spawned a slew of similar games," then C&C did that, and more: it opened the door for the entire RTS genre.

In short, I disagree: C&C is a Great Game by any definition.

Generals? Generals was a joke. I mean yes, it was a great game. But it was not a REAL C&C Game. It didn't have the signature C&C Build cues, it did not have an alternate reality or cool technology. Those three things make an RTS game C&C worthy, but they don't always make it C&C.pcman2005

well the fact that it took alot of ques from warcraft was a bit strange (get ppl to build, fog of war was changed etc) but i liked it alot.

I'd rather not get into a discussion about Generals: I really didn't care for the way they altered the basic style of play, among other things.

I'd rather focus on the fact that the signature RTS isn't on the list.