BioWare Tackles Strategy with Command & Conquer Generals 2

[Krantos]

I'm predicting EA will open a BioWare Sports studio in no more than six months. Nice way to butcher a brand.

This.

When I read the article and Tito asked "Why BioWare?" my only response was: Have you not been paying attention?

BioWare used to be an single-player RPG studio. Now they make shooters, action-RPGs, a MMORPG, and now an RTS.

They're now just using the name to sell shit. I don't think anyone over there gives a crap anymore. They're just making money at this point.

 

[Brownie101]

The franchise stopped being Venerable after it was no longer handled by Westwood alone.
As for BioWare taking over an RTS? I honestly can't see this working, what with BioWare being reknowned for Story. Good story is great and all, but story's not a huge focus in an RTS. You want solid multiplayer, with plenty of variety in ways to obliterate your opponent. Yea, it'll probably be fun. No, I won't buy it for several reasons.
EA and their DRM being one.
BioWare doing an RTS for two.
A searing hatred of EA for taking my favourite company for three.

 

[TheSYLOH]

Command and Conquers: Generals was a shitty game....
However, if you are able to mentally replace "Command and Conquer:" with "Age of"
Then Age of Generals was a pretty nice game.
Sure it didn't innovate much, heck they just renamed "God Powers" as "General Powers"
But they stuck to a tried and tested formula, and gave it a very entertaining modern spin.

 

[qou2600]

Isn't the C&C franchise the one that uses live actors? So wouldn't this be the perfect RTS for Bioware's character development based narrative style?

 

[Warachia]

At least they've said that Generals 2 will be PC exclusive. I'm glad most sane game developers have realized that RTS will just never work on consoles - unless Kinect voice commands get a lot better.

But RTS games CAN work on consoles, the only one that did it right though was an AVP game on the original Xbox that no one remembers.

Other than that, this came completely out of left field. I don't know why you would try to include character and emotion into an RTS, so Bioware would be the last place I'd look if I wanted to make one.

 

[Soviet Steve]

I'm glad that EA makes things origin only so that all temptation to buy these games is removed.

 

[klasbo]

[...] No, my question is this: Will there be a BFME3 after The Hobbit comes out?

There won't. EA doesn't have the IP rights to it any more, which is why the servers were shut down.

So when does the franchise go cover-based shooter?

They tried, and it was cancelled.

[...] The tier one incomes were the workers (GLA), supply trucks (China) and the chinooks (US). The amount of money they brought in was proportional to their cost. The worker was the best one simply because he also served as the construction unit.

I liked the chinooks best, because they double up as ridiculously fast transports. Dropping dozers to grab extra expansions, or to build emp turrets next to their construction facilities (SW general), or use as an anti-missile defence (Air general) were great fun "speshul takktiks".

Zero Hour was a great LAN game. It's surprisingly easy to become competent at the game after just a few matches, so there isn't such a massive skill-gap as there can be with other games, espscially if you just want to play against AI, or other custom maps.

At least they've said that Generals 2 will be PC exclusive. I'm glad most sane game developers have realized that RTS will just never work on consoles - unless Kinect voice commands get a lot better.

But RTS games CAN work on consoles, the only one that did it right though was an AVP game on the original Xbox that no one remembers.

Other than that, this came completely out of left field. I don't know why you would try to include character and emotion into an RTS, so Bioware would be the last place I'd look if I wanted to make one.

Get thee to a nunnery diamond league! With a dual analog stick.
(Yes, I know Starcraft isn't "optimised for controllers", but seeing our favourite pro players with a controller would look ridiculous. It just doesn't work, and there's not a whole lot more to it.)

I wouldn't get Bioware, or anyone Bioware-related for an RTS either. I'd rather have the focus be on good gameplay, rather than copious amounts of plot-holes and button-awesome interconnection.

 

[Little Duck]

Since Red alert 1, generals has by far been my favourite C&C game. It took itself seriously, had a story line which didn't constantly jack off America, more represented them as they were, (America wasn't even featured in Red alert and C&C 1. Why did it become the big Uber power in the later games) and had the most fun gameplay. At least for me. I do hope bioware get this one right. I'm sure they will but still, I love this series.

 

[JaceArveduin]

[...] No, my question is this: Will there be a BFME3 after The Hobbit comes out?

There won't. EA doesn't have the IP rights to it any more, which is why the servers were shut down.

Yeah, I know. But The Hobbits probably going to be breaking some records, and EA realized they could make money during the Trilogy with the BFME games, so what's stopping them from reacquiring the rights for another 5 years or so to make BFME3?

 

[MammothBlade]

Excellent! This made my day. I'm calling it now - Game of The Year 2013! ^_^

It may be possibly the best move for Generals. If it expands upon the strengths of the original Generals whilst keeping to the staples of C&C, count me in. I absolutely loved Generals, and it got better with Zero Hour.

Though this hasn't negated the existence of Origin in the slightest. I'll be keeping a close eye on how Generals 2 turns out.

 

[Warachia]

At least they've said that Generals 2 will be PC exclusive. I'm glad most sane game developers have realized that RTS will just never work on consoles - unless Kinect voice commands get a lot better.

But RTS games CAN work on consoles, the only one that did it right though was an AVP game on the original Xbox that no one remembers.

Other than that, this came completely out of left field. I don't know why you would try to include character and emotion into an RTS, so Bioware would be the last place I'd look if I wanted to make one.

Get thee to a nunnery diamond league! With a dual analog stick.
(Yes, I know Starcraft isn't "optimised for controllers", but seeing our favourite pro players with a controller would look ridiculous. It just doesn't work, and there's not a whole lot more to it.)

I wouldn't get Bioware, or anyone Bioware-related for an RTS either. I'd rather have the focus be on good gameplay, rather than copious amounts of plot-holes and button-awesome interconnection.

It can work, mostly by including a mini map that the second analog stick controls, it allows you to move across the field quickly, and double clicking units allows you to select all units of that type, allowing for smart unit movement, sadly, not one other console RTS figured this out. Don't decry the game if you've never looked it up or played it.

As for your second statement, I stopped as soon as I saw it was spoiler warning on mass effect 2, I already read Shamus's terrible article and wrote a reply pointing out how almost all of his "plotholes" were either things he personally didn't like, or events they explained that he forgot about, and I'm not about to sit through the videos where somebody does the same thing. I watched part of the first one and quit when the guy started saying something was bad in his opinion. I've got nothing against people stating their opinion, only when they try to pass it off as fact.

 

[Motiv_]

The second part, yes, that's garbage, but that's an easy change they'll more than likely make.

The only things needed to fix Origin, in my opinion, is the firing most[footnote]If not all[/footnote] of the support staff, fix all the bugs with purchasing[footnote]Getting charged 2 or 3 times for one game sure is fun, right?[/footnote] and make the forums and your games separate entities. It's pretty fucking moronic that someone got permanently banned from access to all of his games that he paid for because SOMEONE ELSE wrote an inflammatory insult on the EA forums and put his name in the quote box.

Once all that is fixed, I won't actually mind Origin. Requiring an internet connection to even play single player games is kinda dumb, but it's not a deal breaker. Sorry to hear about your troubles with Steam though, I haven't had a problem yet.

 

[Spencer Petersen]

EA seem hell bent on usurping the crown of "Most Hated Game Developer" from Activision, going as far as to use the same technique of cannibalizing a studio for its name and using it to sell games on brand recognition. Even if Bioware was going into this game whole-hog, they have no experience in RTS design, balance or management. With this, ME3, TOR (which should require the complete resources of Bioware to patch, update and monitor in its fledgling days/weeks), DA3 and now this, there is no way that Bioware is doing all the work. Most likely they are dividing it up amongst smaller developers like Activision did with Sledgehammer, only using the Bioware name to wring out any remaining fan appreciation. I can only imagine the conversation.

EA Exec 1: Hey man, we already have a shooter out that shot itself in the foot to compete with COD and a WoW-clone on the way, but we still need to try to mimic Acti-Blizz's other successful franchise, Starcraft.

EA Exec 2: I know, but every RTS we've crapped out since we butchered Westwood has been shit, how are we going to trick people to buy it?

EA Exec 1: I know, we could throw the Bioware label on it to get the last little bit of fan money we didn't completely ruin with DA2.

EA Exec 2: But Bioware has never made an RTS game, or even any game with competitive multiplayer. I guess we should just use their label and outsource all the real work to a bunch of other studios who we can keep behind the scenes.

Ea Exec 1: So we are going to intentionally defraud consumers by selling a product under a studio that we bought out and used as a brand name like with Origin Systems, Bullfrog Productions and Westwood Studios? Count me in!

*High Five*

 

[KiKiweaky]

I think another issue is that this will most likely require Origin, sad but true.

nnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

Ye the game looks nice but if i have to install and run that filth on my computer I think I'll hang onto my money and buy something else.

 

[RicoADF]

Well EA butchered the C&C franchise and the Red Alert franchise, might as well make it a 3 for 3 job right?

You didn't even like the original Generals? I thoroughly enjoyed that one.

Its a good rts, but not a c&c, ea shouldn't have put the c&c name on it

 

[Blatherscythe]

Awesome, this was one of the first RTS's I truly got into thanks to my brother, can't wait to tell him the news if he doesn't know.

Also... Can I have some new shoes?

 

[Urh]

Well, they couldn't possibly fuck things up worse than EA did with C&C 4. At least I hope they don't.

 

[Cid Silverwing]

I must have missed all those people asking for a sequel to a ten-year old spin-off game that nobody really cared about in the first place.

It's almost like making a sequel to Resident Evil Gaiden.

Oh my god, THIS.

And lest we forget, Generals glorified the War on Terror because the GLA were totally not ripped from the headlines after 9/11.

 

[PhantomEcho]

I must have missed all those people asking for a sequel to a ten-year old spin-off game that nobody really cared about in the first place.

It's almost like making a sequel to Resident Evil Gaiden.

Oh my god, THIS.

And lest we forget, Generals glorified the War on Terror because the GLA were totally not ripped from the headlines after 9/11.

Hey, hello.


Hi there. Yeah. I'm one of the many, many people who loved the HELL out of Generals. Because it was a damn good game. I also liked C&C 3, back before EA had to try their 'reinvent everything and turn it into shit' phase in the series (C&C 4).

You see, Generals was their way of branching off into a universe they could play around with. And in order to do something unique, without making it so that they could never make another Tiberian Universe/Red Alert Universe game again... they set it in a pseudo-realistic world where terrorism had risen into the spotlight.

Because it had. And it still is pretty high up there on most folks' concerns these days. Really, aside from COMPLETE NUCLEAR ANNIHILATION... terrorism, unmanned drones, or the Drug Wars are really your only options for serious combat. And only one of those would make for an interesting game experience. (Two, if you consider that many of the drug lords are also leaders of local terrorist organizations)

I'm very, very excited to see how they do a second take.

And there's plenty more folks like me, too.



So how's about you do us all a little favor, and not jump to any conclusions just yet about the popularity of Generals. You might just have to eat those words if the game turns out to kick even as much ass as the first one did.

Of course in that case, you and the guy you quoted would probably just come back with a weak-ass excuse about how we're all just a bunch of casual-gamer sissies who can't tell our asses from a thermo-nuclear device... but hey.

They could always screw this one up like they did C&C 4.

And then you'd likely never see another 'spin-off nobody cared about' again, because they'd just chuck the whole damn property in the trash as un-sellable.

That's how EA works, after all.