Command & Conquer 4 Taking Cues From MMOGs?

[Bigsmith]

The first RTS game with heavy RPG elements...Hey, EA, did you ever here of a little game called DEMIGOD?

Don't forget Warcraft 3.

sorry for double post

 

[Loafers]

Like Age of Emipires 3 Town hall system where you can get bonuses shipped to you so long as you have progressed up the bonus tree?

"the first mobile base in RTS games,"

Like the Fatboy from Supream Commander that could dock air craft, produce units, and fire 4 battle ship sized cannon batteries from a mobile platform?

I am just trying to say that EA's "inovations" are stolen from other games. The game still could be good, but inovative it is not.

Yeah for me it really depends on what they mean by progression. An RTS is supposed to have everyone starting at the same point when they enter the game so it's a battle of strategy, build order, and micro/macro management. C&C 3 and RA 3 were OK, but they didn't last very long (both having some very bad balance issues and the Co-Op commander thing was just a resource hog rather than an innovative way to tackle missions).

You don't even have to go as recent as Supreme Commander for mobile bases. Apparently EA never heard of the Mothership in Homeworld? That game had 3-D combat as well, not something you saw in RTS's at the time.

SO HA, C&C 3 was a fail and let down to the series and they should have of abandond the 'Haversters' log ago and just allowed you to place the refineres strait onto the depoist, this is not a problem i am having with other games as the harvests in thouse are the cheepest blooming unit in the game. Such as workers/peons/floaty orb things in Warcraft 3 and there is no reasorse gathering in the story mode of Dow 2, and in Starcraft the 'Probes' are the cheepest unit in the game.

The reason harvesters are so expensive is because you only need 1-2 per base, one is given to you for free when you build a refinery, and they don't die in a single shot like a probe or drone. Not to mention those worker units have to construct, while in C&C it is all done passively by the MCV.

Also if you want to use any RTS you should use Company of Heroes. Dawn of War has the same mechanics (because they are both made by Relic) but Company of Heroes is better by a thousand bounds. Passive resource generation and little time spent staring at your base for upgrades/building production? Wonderful. Dawn of War is plagued with overpowered Space Marines (but that's more Game's Workshop's fault because it is the same in the tabletop).

 

[Legion]

Command & Conquer should have died with Westwood.

The Tiberium based C+C games should have. I enjoyed Red Alert 2, Generals + Zero Hour.

 

[oliveira8]

Command & Conquer should have died with Westwood.

The Tiberium based C+C games should have. I enjoyed Red Alert 2, Generals + Zero Hour.

Red Alert 2 was made by Westwood.

Generals and so on weren't. And General sucks compared to previous C&C.

 

[Legion]

Command & Conquer should have died with Westwood.

The Tiberium based C+C games should have. I enjoyed Red Alert 2, Generals + Zero Hour.

Red Alert 2 was made by Westwood.

Generals and so on weren't. And General sucks compared to previous C&C.

Wasn't RA2 Westwood and EA?

Generals is still way better than the god awfulness that is Command and Conquer 3 though.

 

[oliveira8]

Command & Conquer should have died with Westwood.

The Tiberium based C+C games should have. I enjoyed Red Alert 2, Generals + Zero Hour.

Red Alert 2 was made by Westwood.

Generals and so on weren't. And General sucks compared to previous C&C.

Wasn't RA2 Westwood and EA?

Generals is still way better than the god awfulness that is Command and Conquer 3 though.

It was published by EA. EA was always(Or most of the time) Westwood publisher. Later EA just bought them.

 

[SultanP]

try to make anything new

Stop Right there. There's been quite a few of them, and they didn't turn out well.

Oh really? Which ones?

Spellforce 1 & 2
Battle For Middle Earth
Titan Quest
Demigod
Fallout Tactics (However that was a RPG with RTS elements but it still counts)
Warcraft 2 & 3

Alright, you got a few of them right. However... Warcraft 2 didn't have any of that leveling or xp stuff in it. Titan quest was not an RTS as such, more a hack and slash, like diablo, and tactics was about commanding a squad of a very few soldiers, which can't be compared to an rts based on armies as the combat systems are completely different. Spellforce, can't comment. there was an error in the game that wouldn't let me finish the tutorial. The rest are games with completely different settings. So I would like them to try to put all the pieces together in a new way, and see what comes out. I think someone is bound to be able to pull it off, it might be this time.

 

[Evil the White]

It all depends how they do it.

If it was like TF2 and operated on milestones, eg 200 enemy units defeated gives you a new power for the campaign, then it would be quite cool. But I don't want to grind in an RTS.

Adding a leveling system to online multiplayer is a bad idea. It completely defeats the point of an RTS. It's supposed to be a battle of wits, not a battle of how long you play. A LOT of RTS fans are going to be very, very upset if this trend catches on.

My point exactly. The point of playing for ages is that you get better as a player, not because your units suddenly are more powerful. If this was campaign-only, then it would work, because then some of the later levels with hoards of assaulting enemies would make good use of some powerups.

I still say a C&C FPS would be incredible though, if they did a decent job of it.