Command & Conquer: Generals 2 Single Player May Still Exist

[weirdee]

The point is, if you're gonna cram the single player into the game in the last two months, I don't think anybody is going to enjoy or thank you for that. In fact, it just shows that you didn't care before, and putting it in now is only a minor, half assed concession you are making in an attempt to shut people up, instead of actually caring about the situation.

If they do make a proper campaign, it'll take too long to do before people lose interest in the game, so right now they're in a spot they can't really weasel their way out of easily.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Sorry, no longer have any interest in the game. I will have nothing to do with games created under this man from now on.

 

[Paladin2905]

I get the feeling that this is in the same boat as Syndicate- the newest iteration will not have any of the old feeling or charm, so the addition of the C&C name will only serve to alienate those people who remember it fondly from a while back.

Also yeah, when they start saying the game will be great because of the graphics that is an immediate cause for me to not invest in a game.

 

[redisforever]

End of Nations rip-off.

That is what this will be.
Will quote this very post when this game is released saying: "I was right, bitches".


Command and Conquer is dead, bros.
Nobody will ever make a C&C game like the old ones, because nobody cares about old school RTS games outside of Starcraft.

End of Nations has got a very good niche to fill, and MoBA's like Dota 2 and Lol are the closest thing to a strategy game people are willing to play.

Generals 2 wil fail, 100%, no doubt.

As much as it pains me to say it, you're probably right. Well, I hope that Company of Heroes 2 does well. That'll probably be the last RTS I'll buy for a long time. For now though, I'm going to go play some Tiberian Sun, and remember all the good times I've had.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

For Generals 2 I actually wouldn't mind a singleplayer where there was no story or cutscenes, just interesting situations and scenarios that you had to play through: creating situations and objectives that are otherwise impossible to find in a skirmish or multiplayer map. Heck, give out map editor tools and let your community create their own scenarios, you now have more singleplayer content streaming into the game regularly than you could ever dream of making.

This is good initial news, but it still doesn't solve the problem of having a game that is supposedly both running off the free2play model, yet balanced enough to be used as a competitive Esports title. That won't work, even if they begin with a purely cosmetic micro transaction promise, it'll be broken as soon as the number of players show any signs of dropping.
Or they could release every unit for sponsorship: In next weeks update we reveal the new Coke-a-cola Tank, and the Samsung Submarine!

 

[TephlonPrice]

For Generals 2 I actually wouldn't mind a singleplayer where there was no story or cutscenes, just interesting situations and scenarios that you had to play through: creating situations and objectives that are otherwise impossible to find in a skirmish or multiplayer map. Heck, give out map editor tools and let your community create their own scenarios, you now have more singleplayer content streaming into the game regularly than you could ever dream of making.

This is good initial news, but it still doesn't solve the problem of having a game that is supposedly both running off the free2play model, yet balanced enough to be used as a competitive Esports title. That won't work, even if they begin with a purely cosmetic micro transaction promise, it'll be broken as soon as the number of players show any signs of dropping.
Or they could release every unit for sponsorship: In next weeks update we reveal the new Coke-a-cola Tank, and the Samsung Submarine!

Off the F2P model, the only way to make it work in e-sports is that all units that you can buy with IRL money must be essentially recolors or prettied up versions of existing units; ie, they're different in terms of appearance, but the same in terms of actual combat capability. Problem is, that philosophy doesn't last long. Look at Combat Arms when they first introduced weapons for IRL money. It started off as cosmetic improvements; now there's weapons that can body 9000 times over with no rank restriction or anything.

As for the whole campaign, go one further & allow for a Skirmish mode. RA1 on the PS1 had it, so there's no excuse for it not to be here, especially when you're trying to sell a F2P RTS game.

OT: Frostbite 2 will only work here if it actually contributes to gameplay (infantry can be garrisoned behind things, use enemy vehicles for spare parts, etc.).

 

[Kahani]

On the one hand, yes, C&C4 sucked donkey balls. On the other hand, I actually quite enjoyed C&C3 and Red Alert 3, even though Westwood were long dead by that point. Generals 2 may well suck, but I'm willing to give it a chance.