A new Command&Conquer game: why not?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

I've recently installed again C&C: Red Alert 3, and this got me wondering: isn't it the right time for a new Command&Conquer videogame? The classic rts type I mean, not the awkward action-y spinoffs.

It is my understanding C&C games sell well, isn't it? I know I'd throw my money at the screen the moment a new C&C is announced, and I'm sure a lot of people would feel the same.

The new two C&C rts games made by EA were obviously different from the originals, but it's clear they did their best to keep the spirit of the original games intact. I liked them.

An extra question: which is your favorite C&C game of all time? Mine is, no doubt, Red Alert 2.

Ya "they did their best" part is why I would say no, leave it be. When your best comes out like that it's time to pack the bags and do new things.
Not that any of this matters because a new C&C is in the works, now under the skilful management of Bioware... couldn't possibly go wrong in any way.

Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 2 were my favourites, mechanics were pretty basic but their crazy stories and darn good mix with movie clips made them a very interesting joyride.

Well I would welcome a new C&C game if EA not involved or rather the Westwiid crews were behind it. Well ok General is probably my favourite but none the less they should stay faithful to the game since if it's not broken, why fix it?

Smooth Operator:
Ya "they did their best" part is why I would say no, leave it be. When your best comes out like that it's time to pack the bags and do new things.

But what was bad about the two C&C games that EA made? They kept the soul of the series, and they kept the same gameplay while trying to innovate it. And, they kept the first person dialogue view and live actors (I really love that about C&C.. no other videogame does it nowadays).

The only thing I didn't like was the cheap sexism of Red Alert 3... it didn't irritate me because it was so tongue-in-cheek, but RA2 had hot babes too and without making it the main advertisement of the game.

Smooth Operator:

Not that any of this matters because a new C&C is in the works, now under the skilful management of Bioware... couldn't possibly go wrong in any way.

It is??? For sure???

8bitOwl:

Smooth Operator:

Not that any of this matters because a new C&C is in the works, now under the skilful management of Bioware... couldn't possibly go wrong in any way.

It is??? For sure???

Oh yes they are doing all sorts of innovative stuff with it.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-15-biowares-command-and-conquer-generals-repurposed-for-new-free-to-play-venture

I won't go into RA3 because it just makes me angry.

Smooth Operator:

8bitOwl:

Smooth Operator:

Not that any of this matters because a new C&C is in the works, now under the skilful management of Bioware... couldn't possibly go wrong in any way.

It is??? For sure???

Oh yes they are doing all sorts of innovative stuff with it.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-15-biowares-command-and-conquer-generals-repurposed-for-new-free-to-play-venture

I won't go into RA3 because it just makes me angry.

I stopped at F2P. :/

Well, looks like it hasn't updated since 2013 tho.

8bitOwl:
Snip.

This is going to be a long explanation but i should roundly cover your question.

EA is institutionally incompetent hacks incapable of making good decisions and more than capable of making shitty games. They disregard the PC as a serious platform and RTS as a market whist holding one of the best know IPs in history. That's the short version. The long version well...

In 1998 EA bought westwood studios. They then set about destroying the corporate culture and ability to function interdependently of the studio as they do with all acquisitions. Many original employees left in this period and some were unhappy with the direction EA was taking them. EA increasingly tightened day to day control and went about canceling projects and micro-managing. By 2003 EA had closed Westwood studios and shortly after the completion of CnC generals the last original members of Westwood left EA.

The studio was merged into Westwood Pacific or EA:Pacific with a few other teams EA had acquired and continued to make products under the weswood name but also the EA pacific name. By the end of 2003 Westwood, EA pacific and other small teams had been merged into EA: Los-Angles.

All of these mergers and closings were designed to create more direct control by EA and removed name studios from operating in an Auteur fashion it seems. This also had the effect of making staff leave the studios in droves and the projects done under EA were often given tight time-frames, were meddled with by upper management or were given insufficient resources. This put a strain on projects.

By the time CnC 3 (2007) rolled around the team was functioning under increasing crunch after the studio was churning out other games. In a revealing interview with Greg Black he reveals that CnC 3 was essentially created in a single year, the team given insufficient time and money to make things as they would like. They were unhappy with the pathing system for instance.

"I was not happy with how C&C3 or RA3 turned out, our games were always rushed, our engine technology aged and degraded over the years, our path finding was horrible, our online implementations were embarrassing, and ultimately our games did not, in my view, live up to the original C&C"

There games were... okay but you could tell many aspects were rushed. People cared less about these slightly average titles certainly and the brand was losing it's shine. They were not classics but CnC wasn't dead yet even after a couple of lackluster expansions for each game.#

Now for the REALLY shitty part. CnC 4 was a terrible game that essentially killed the franchise. I'm sure EA will blame the PC audience and the RTS market but the fact is they failed so spectacularly hard and it has removed any appetite to try again.

"The important thing to know is that C&C4 was never meant to be a true Tiberium universe canonical game, but rather an experiment in online play. It originally started as out an Asian market online-only version of C&C 3. At some point the company executives decided it made the most business sense to add a single player campaign, call it C&C4, and put it in a box."

The game was rushed out in about 6 months to be a DOA release. It's some of the best proof that EA, as a corporation, does not know how to make good games, good financial decisions or even what a good game is.

So CnC isn't being made anymore because EA did everything possible to run it into the ground and destroy it's marketability and profitability in a show of complete disregard. CnC is iconic. EA are fucking stupid. So stupid they managed arguably the most iconic RTS series into a financial loser for them.

Smooth Operator:

8bitOwl:

Smooth Operator:

Not that any of this matters because a new C&C is in the works, now under the skilful management of Bioware... couldn't possibly go wrong in any way.

It is??? For sure???

Oh yes they are doing all sorts of innovative stuff with it.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-15-biowares-command-and-conquer-generals-repurposed-for-new-free-to-play-venture

I won't go into RA3 because it just makes me angry.

That got canceled a year ago.

Seems like there won't be a new C & C game for a while. Their last attempt seems to have failed even more miserably than C & C 4. The message on the official page is quite amusing, apparently nobody wanted F2P online multiplayer only RTS. http://www.commandandconquer.com/en/news/1380/a-new-future-for-command-conquer

8bitOwl:

The only thing I didn't like was the cheap sexism of Red Alert 3... it didn't irritate me because it was so tongue-in-cheek, but RA2 had hot babes too and without making it the main advertisement of the game.

This. RA3 was too much, RA2 was kind of camp and fun with some comical units but RA3 was 50% babes and way to many comical units.

I agree with the rest of the posters: C&C4 was crap and a new one is unlikely to ever appear. I actually don't really like Tiberian Sun's campaign or storyline. RA2 is my favourite C&C game.

It feels like it's been forever, I really should play some RA3 again, I didn't mind that game since I quite liked the tongue in cheek acting from Tim Curry, George, Simmons and Pryce. The units while being comical grew on me like the Giga Fortress and King Oni units, I love the majority of them (save for some infantry feeling useless like peacekeepers, conscripts).

I really would love a new C&C but the last two attempts were really bad to a point where EA just flat out gave up through trying to make Generals 2 (It didn't help that people were petitioning to have GLA a core component faction to the series removed which would make it a non Generals game) and since then there's been next to no news about anything C&C that I can see but at this stage I don't really care about the whole EA is evil bullshit people still throw around like some victim of severe abuse, having a C&C around now would be really nice though.

While I didn't mind C&C 4 the story felt pretty shit, the units were okay until a few got nerfed since beta like the Kodiak but in the end it was something of a game trying to be akin to Dawn of War and it flopped more or less, still I liked the soundtrack and a bit of the atmosphere and sometimes I'll play it now and then.

That said we really do need a new C&C I feel the RTS genre (no nothing turn based please that's RTT) has been getting less attention and much less love compared to RTT,FPS,RPG and Indie platformers and others in general, all we have for RTS games akin to C&C (yes I know Supreme Com) are Planetary Annihilation and the eventually upcoming Grey Goo and that's all I can actually see in terms of new RTS games that are willing to invent something new and aren't cheaply made (talking of actual cheaply made indie no one knows RTS because lord knows someone's going to give me an example).

I really miss Command & Conquer. Hell, I missed Thanksgiving dinner one year because I was in the middle of a Red Alert 2 game and I was #7 on the tournament ladder at the time. I had a killer strategy for the map Mayday that was practically unbeatable.

That said, I don't think I've actually given much of a damn about the franchise since Red Alert 2. I mean, Generals and its expansion were pretty decent RTS titles, but pretty lackluster C&C titles. The less said about 3, RA3, and 4 probably the better.

At this point it'd probably be best to let the name rest in peace and start up a new franchise.

Darn, and you actually made me think there was gong to be another command and conquer game. But anyway I liked the original red alert game. That was the best in my opinion.

Unlike X-Com. I don't think C&C is worth reviving.

Let it die. As long as EA is involved, C&C is dead.

The Tiberian series has had its run, let's not talk about C&C4, it would have been cool to see that FPS get released but it "didn't meet quality standards."

RA3 at least kept the tone right. But I don't want to see it hurt anymore.

I don't give a shit about generals.

Command and Conquer is dead to me now.

EA plainly does not care about it being a venerated franchise, nor does anyone still working for them evidently know how to bring forward the RTS genre in any meaningful way.

Ill still have my old favorites in the form of the First Decade anthology as well as Tiberium Wars, Kanes Wrath and Red Alert 3 all on disc, at least for as long as those last, after which i would rather pirate them than see EA paid for works theyve all but abandoned.

I even have a disc copy of Twilight. As a reminder to never make the same mistake.

Only thing left to say is that if youre interested in the games at all and dont own them, then please obtain a copy in a way that does not see EA paid for it. You may interpret that as you like.

Or if youe looking for some excellent RTS fixes, then i shall point you towards Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance, AI War: Fleet Command, and Planetary Annihilation, even though its still pre-release.

Smooth Operator:

8bitOwl:

Smooth Operator:

Not that any of this matters because a new C&C is in the works, now under the skilful management of Bioware... couldn't possibly go wrong in any way.

It is??? For sure???

Oh yes they are doing all sorts of innovative stuff with it.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-15-biowares-command-and-conquer-generals-repurposed-for-new-free-to-play-venture

Youre way, way out of date there.

That game went into closed alpha sometime last year, and was scrapped entirely less than a month later along with the dev studio due to a bit of criticism.

And for the record, the studio in question had nothing to do with Bioware, they only had that name attached to them as a marketing gimmick. And the change was reverted before they got closed anyway.

I really would love a new RTS akin to CnC.
I was excited about the thoughts of a new CnC, but heard more about it and was deeply saddened.
Generals was my introduction into the franchise, and I then purchased Tiberium Wars and Kane's Wrath a few years after.
Quite liked it, got Red Alert 3, had loads of fun with it.
Got The First Decade and played a few of the earlier titles.
But so far all I have is CnC and Supreme Commander.
I don't like games with population limits (An exception is made for SupCom because the population limits are stupidly high.), I feel like it places an arbitrary cap on things, and then it becomes more of a "Do I want a large army to outnumber them?" or "Do I want a well-balanced force?" and then - Oh shit! You've been wiped out because they could build more turrets than you could field an army.
Universe At War: Earth Assault wasn't horrible, despite a population cap, each unit never took up too much of it at a time, and the factions played massively different from one another. But still, it kinda lacked the attraction that kept me hooked like the CnC games have.

I Don't have quite the hate for EA, most people have concerning command and conquer as both generals, and tiberium wars were both very good. After C&C 3, its pretty clear IMHO that the series took a dip (RA3), then basically crashed and burned (C&C4, and generals 2). unfortunately C&Cs dead, let it die.

See, I don't think another C&C would be good, that sort of died with Westwood. However if we could get something like Divinity or Grimrock in RTS form, where someone makes a game like they used to, now that would be something I'd throw my money at.

I miss the good old days when you actually built walls around your base. It was actually a base, not just some outpost thing or a mobile home. Hell I even miss the cheesy live action clips between missions. It had so much soul, something that seems so rare these days.

As for favorite? Gosh that's a tough one. It stands between Red alert 2 and Tiberian sun.
In Red alert you could do so many silly things with all those special units they had. Either bunker down behind a wall of grand cannons, camp infantry buildings with snipers or just blow the whole thing up with desolator trucks. Or if you really wanted to be fancy, combine the IFV with Tanya or a Chrono Legionnaire. And then there was the superweapons, oh and the kirov airships!

On the other hand you have Tiberian sun, where you could bomb a base to hell with atillery, deforming the terrain so they could not rebuild. The rescource was also quite interesting, as it actually hurt organic units that walked over them.
Despite having more or less the same mechanics as Red alert, it still felt uniqe because of the story and the units.
A tank that shoots a beam that levetates it's target, or a flamethrowing tank that can burrow and drive under ground was just fun to play with.

I don't know, but it seems like we don't get these creative RTS games these days, which is kinda sad. I miss the giant squid, I miss the desolator, the crazy ivan, the Mammoth Mk. II and the good old artillery.
Things like sending engineers into key buildings, repairing or destroying bridges, or even sending in a spy for special tech, money or shutting down the power are all things I really have not seen in a while.

Actually, come to think of it... A quick look at steam, and it seems like we have not had a really good RTS game in a really long time. Other than Starcraft 2, I can't really think of a single one. I don't really care if it's a C&C or not, I just want a good RTS game to be made again.

I actually really enjoyed Red Alert 3... I know they overdid the whole sexy ladies shtick, but I just loved the light-hearted nature of the game. I know Red Alert 1 was fairly gritty and serious, but I liked the idea of Red Alert = campy fun times, while C&C = serious story time. Tim Curry, George Simmons and George Takei were amazing, even if the story was, to put it lightly, a little farfetched. The gameplay, though, the meat and bones of the game, I really enjoyed. The single player campaign was a bit too easy because of the forced coop thing, but I enjoyed skirmish and online.

The Uprising expansion was even better, with fantastic units that would never make it into online due to being a balancing nightmare, an actual single player experience with no forced coop, a weird RPG-like campaign that really worked for me, and a challenge mode that was very reminiscent of Generals: Zero Hour's General Challenge. Once you figured out how to cheese em it was easy to ace most of the challenges, but that first time through trying to figure it out myself? Haven't had that much fun in an RTS in a long time.

C&C 4, though.... yes, that was a monstrous failure. I think it might have faired at least a little better if EA slapped a new IP on it, instead of calling it C&C, because let's just face it. That wasn't C&C, and the only reason why it was called C&C was to sell the game to an already large fanbase. The gameplay, while overly simple, was somewhat unique and kind of fun, but it had absolutely no place in the C&C universe. So, I don't know. I doubt it would have been a huge success or anything, it still wasn't that good, but I feel it might not have been blammed so hard if it wasn't C&C.

Well, spoiler alerts here for the next two paragraphs, if anyone even really still cares about C&C4's story.

On the storyline side of it... I really feel like EA missed the point here. Yes, Kane is more than meets the eye, we've all known that ever since he returned after being blasted by an ion cannon in C&C2, despite the fact that he was disintegrated by an ion cannon in the original. We knew Kane had to have a big reveal in this game. He couldn't keep up the mystical "what the hell is he?" thing forever, especially not after the Scrin ending in C&C3. But out of everything he could have been, I would not think "Loving, kind-hearted alien who just wants to go home". It almost felt like EA wanted to make him out as some sort of messiah, what with his desire to save earth from Tiberian (Tiberium? Make up your minds). Of course... we still don't really know who or what Kane is. The only real "reveal" he did was stepping through a portal...

The story also threw away several key points established in the previous C&C games, such as LEGION. Where the hell did that AI that Kane was so pleased to connect to the Tacitus go? What about the Scrin? I thought they were making plans to put together an actual invasion force? And why is the Overlord so interested in whatever Kane is? Hell, I'd have settled for even a simple nod at Scrin's existence at all... it seems like everyone forgot they even existed in C&C4, aside from the terrible Scrin Tower plot. "Your wife" also felt extremely forced. I groaned every single time she was on screen or even just simply referenced. Yeah, I get it, you're a human GDI commander, you're likely to have a family. I just really hate how much she felt like a character from a soap opera. Even her death was forced. The gung-ho GDI general kills your wife, making it look like NOD did it, so that she could trust you to help her break the peace treaty between GDI and NOD, who were working together to try to save earth from Tiberian, just because "Grr! Kane is the enemy! He must die!". Let's be honest here, that plot point was only just so that you'd have the obligatory choice of going GDI or NOD. And the stupid thing? Both endings are the same. Player character gets shot, opens portal for Kane, Kane thanks player character, Kane looks super sorry he can't save you, steps through portal, player character dies, lots of news reports about how ERMAGERD, TIBERIAN IS VANISHING, BROTHERHOOD OF NOD HAVE ALL ASCENDED, BUT I BET KANE WILL BE BAAAAACK!

End of spoilers

Yeah... to put it bluntly... as long as C&C is in the hands of EA, let it die. I'm saddened by this, because I loved the series up to and including RA3. But C&C4 was just... so terrible... and then there was the attempts at making Generals 2 a F2P multiplayer game... who the hell thought that was a good idea? Thank god that's been cancelled. And then after EA destroyed another one of my old beloved game IPs with their terrible Dungeon Keeper Mobile cash grab? They've had too many terrible ideas with great IPs in recent times that I just don't want them anywhere near anything I love, ever. It's pretty damned clear that what little knowledge in good games and business decisions they had is now completely gone.

I certainly wouldn't complain of another C&C game, but RTS games (with the notable exception of StarCraft 2) have kind of run their course at this point.

C&C and a good chunk of its sequels hit their stride during the RTS game explosion of the mid to late 90's, when pretty much every company was cranking out RTS games like mad. Now, PC RTS games are sort of a dying breed, so another C&C game doesn't really have a place to go unless they really overhauled or changed everything, and then to me it's not really Command and Conquer anymore.

Scrape together some of the original Westwood crew, then don't call it C&C, but make a good RTS in a setting that vaguely resembles the original C&C.

I could get behind that.

Otherwise, no. A great RTS game I can get behind, but who would also want a continuation of that terrible excuse for a story really?

Favorite C&C game? Total Annihilation - ok, technically not C&C but it was the same style but imho executed way better - it's sequels (spiritually) Supreme Commander was also quite good (just picked up the gold edition free with my recent GPU purchase - ATI are doing three free games) though I wasn't as keen on SC2, but it wasn't bad, just didn't like the tech tree and points rather than just upgrades.

No, because EA.

Pretty much sums up the bulk of the arguments here.

That said I wouldn't mind a new RTS.

While I would love to see a new C&C game, after 4 and that abortion of a F2P title I'd prefer someone else was making it.

As to favourite? Huh.. would either be the original Red Alert or Generals/Zero Hour.

Edit: Forgot about this: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/08/08/not-a-new-wargame-but-a-war-game-act-of-aggression/

The guys behind the Wargame series have a 'new' RTS in the making, sort of keeps the vehicle realism from Wargame but brings back the base building of yesteryear.

Ihateregistering1:
I certainly wouldn't complain of another C&C game, but RTS games (with the notable exception of StarCraft 2) have kind of run their course at this point.

C&C and a good chunk of its sequels hit their stride during the RTS game explosion of the mid to late 90's, when pretty much every company was cranking out RTS games like mad. Now, PC RTS games are sort of a dying breed, so another C&C game doesn't really have a place to go unless they really overhauled or changed everything, and then to me it's not really Command and Conquer anymore.

A good question is: why can't we have RTS anymore? What's wrong with that? Do videogamers nowadays no longer have the patience to play anything that isn't superfast and immediate (just look at how rpg games changed, from Neverwinter Nights 2 and its slow strategical combat to Mass Effect which is more of a shooter than an rpg)?

8bitOwl:

Ihateregistering1:
I certainly wouldn't complain of another C&C game, but RTS games (with the notable exception of StarCraft 2) have kind of run their course at this point.

C&C and a good chunk of its sequels hit their stride during the RTS game explosion of the mid to late 90's, when pretty much every company was cranking out RTS games like mad. Now, PC RTS games are sort of a dying breed, so another C&C game doesn't really have a place to go unless they really overhauled or changed everything, and then to me it's not really Command and Conquer anymore.

A good question is: why can't we have RTS anymore? What's wrong with that? Do videogamers nowadays no longer have the patience to play anything that isn't superfast and immediate (just look at how rpg games changed, from Neverwinter Nights 2 and its slow strategical combat to Mass Effect which is more of a shooter than an rpg)?

Agreed, and even JRPGs seem to be falling into this habit, too. I mean, just look at Final Fantasy, they took a classic combat system that wasn't broken, and kept on trying to give it some different iterations of face-paced action-rpg elements.

I really want a Generals 2. Generals was pretty much perfect.

After C&C 4, I don't want a new C&C from EA.

I liked Red Alert 2 the most, probably. Perfect mix of humourous cutscenes and great gameplay. RA3 wasn't that bad either. But C&C3, Kane's Wrath... and then C&C 4? I'm glad they let the series die.

As for Generals... sorry, that wasn't C&C. C&C is cheesy cutscenes and ridiculous tech.
Generals was a good game series, but it really didn't wasn't C&C.

8bitOwl:

Ihateregistering1:
I certainly wouldn't complain of another C&C game, but RTS games (with the notable exception of StarCraft 2) have kind of run their course at this point.

C&C and a good chunk of its sequels hit their stride during the RTS game explosion of the mid to late 90's, when pretty much every company was cranking out RTS games like mad. Now, PC RTS games are sort of a dying breed, so another C&C game doesn't really have a place to go unless they really overhauled or changed everything, and then to me it's not really Command and Conquer anymore.

A good question is: why can't we have RTS anymore? What's wrong with that? Do videogamers nowadays no longer have the patience to play anything that isn't superfast and immediate (just look at how rpg games changed, from Neverwinter Nights 2 and its slow strategical combat to Mass Effect which is more of a shooter than an rpg)?

This is what I'm wondering almost every day but he does have a point, RTS games these days are really quite rare, I mean the kind that are akin to C&C and Starcraft, Supreme Comm etc not the types that lack base building like Company of Heroes.

These days I'm starting to see a big influx of RTT games and ones like Company of Heroes and it does make me somewhat sad because I'm really just into RTS games like Starcraft, supreme comm and C&C, I know we have the current Planetary Annihilation and eventually Grey Goo but that's all I can think of and know that's full on RTS, one game this year and another next year is pretty damn small for one genre, I just wish more people would help bring RTS back out of the gutter to it's old days from the 90's once more.

Like you though I don't think gamers require every game to be fast paced and instant, there just needs to be more people in the genre that need to invent something new like PA did (generating planets that we can build on, jump off and partially destroy is something totally new to RTS for example) and surely that would bring in more people if not old fans back.

My theory is.... if they make a new C&C game, and they make it like Red Alert 3 or Tiberium Wars, it will sell well. Are they so clueless they didn't realize the reason this series fell into oblivion is because they removed everything that made it C&C... the live action cutscenes, the single player campaign, and the classical rts gameplay?

Well, I wish someone would make a good game that in fact wraps up the Tiberium saga and the entire thing with Kane. As far as I know, that has never been done.

Oh, I know what you're thinking, but the Tempest keep was merely a setback. Go back to your alternate universe where C&C 4 exists.

8bitOwl:

Smooth Operator:
Ya "they did their best" part is why I would say no, leave it be. When your best comes out like that it's time to pack the bags and do new things.

But what was bad about the two C&C games that EA made? They kept the soul of the series, and they kept the same gameplay while trying to innovate it. And, they kept the first person dialogue view and live actors (I really love that about C&C.. no other videogame does it nowadays).

Which C&C's are we talking about? C&C3 & 4? If it's those two:

C&C3: Shitty cutscenes with acting worse than a school play. Why they didn't take Joe as a cutscene director like they did under Westwood is beyond me. It also seems they just took the first take of every scene. And the story was "bleh" with a lot of interesting possibilities, left by Firestorm, completely ignored.
The gameplay was "ok", but for me a good C&C also needs a good campaign, which C&C3 didn't offer.

C&C4: everything there went wrong. The gameplay was a cheap rip-off from Dawn of War 2 and had nothing in common with the old C&C's. And the campaign was even "wronger". But let's not forget C&C4 wasn't supposed to be C&C4 to begin with, it was supposed to be some kind of stand alone game but EA thought "If we slap a shitty campaign and "C&C" on the box than we'll sell more!".

Hezz:
The story also threw away several key points established in the previous C&C games, such as LEGION. Where the hell did that AI that Kane was so pleased to connect to the Tacitus go?

LEGION was re-purposed for some stupid reason and was now The Brotherhood's version of EVA.
It made no fucking sense, LEGION recovered the Tacitus, reunited the splinter factions of The Brotherhood, helped create Nod's ultimate weapon to combat GDI's MARV and is the only thing that can interface with the Tacitus and "he" gets reduced to being a simple Virtual Assistant for Commanders? What the fuck is this shit?
LEGION could command an entire army without physically needing to be there and could process battlefield information and tactical data a million times faster than a human could, why would you relegate your greatest asset to just being an assistant? Are they that afraid of having another CABAL?

What about the Scrin? I thought they were making plans to put together an actual invasion force? And why is the Overlord so interested in whatever Kane is? Hell, I'd have settled for even a simple nod at Scrin's existence at all... it seems like everyone forgot they even existed in C&C4, aside from the terrible Scrin Tower plot.

This seriously pissed me off about CnC4. Aside from Tiberium, the Scrin posed the greatest threat to Earth, and at the end we find out that this force was only a simple harvesting operation? They're preparing for a full-fucking-scale invasion of Earth, and from what we've seen, their air power can seriously ruin anyone's day, not to mention they can open up small localized black holes to throw anything in the vicinity into deep space. If the Scrin harvesting operation showed up so bloody fast after the Liquid Tiberuim detonation at Temple Prime, then it stands that their invasion force would have been at Earth's doorstep long before the Tiberuim Control Network was even finished.

"Your wife" also felt extremely forced. I groaned every single time she was on screen or even just simply referenced. Yeah, I get it, you're a human GDI commander, you're likely to have a family. I just really hate how much she felt like a character from a soap opera. Even her death was forced. The gung-ho GDI general kills your wife, making it look like NOD did it, so that she could trust you to help her break the peace treaty between GDI and NOD, who were working together to try to save earth from Tiberian, just because "Grr! Kane is the enemy! He must die!". Let's be honest here, that plot point was only just so that you'd have the obligatory choice of going GDI or NOD.

Blugh, I really hated this part of the "story", "Hi! I'm some character that's related to your 'character' and you need to care about me! OH NO I'M DEAD BECAUSE WE NEED TO SOMEHOW KEEP THIS SORRY EXCUSE FOR A PLOT MOVING~! EXCEPT I LIVE IF YOU CHOOSE NOD SO PLEASE LET ME LIVE OH NO YOU'RE DYING WHAT DO I DO CRY SOB YOU ARE DEAD -End game-"

And the stupid thing? Both endings are the same. Player character gets shot, opens portal for Kane, Kane thanks player character, Kane looks super sorry he can't save you, steps through portal, player character dies, lots of news reports about how ERMAGERD, TIBERIAN IS VANISHING, BROTHERHOOD OF NOD HAVE ALL ASCENDED, BUT I BET KANE WILL BE BAAAAACK!

Another kicker is that EA had made statements that they were planning on adding new factions for skirmish play, but they never did. I was hoping this would be when the Scrin showed up, or maybe we could get a proper full faction for The Forgotten instead of relegating them to reference and capturable technology structure that lets you call in Forgotten units but they cost stupid amounts of Command Points to field to make them worth it. But, well.... EA.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked