No Single Player for Command and Conquer: Generals 2
- Thread starter Karloff
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Save me from all this e-sports nonsense. I'm glad it's something people enjoy, but I dislike seeing my games retooled for the purpose.
Granted, I haven't liked many of the C&C games that have come out since Generals, but the first couple C&C and Red Alert games were some of my favorites.
Granted, I haven't liked many of the C&C games that have come out since Generals, but the first couple C&C and Red Alert games were some of my favorites.
What about Command and Conquer: Sole Survivor and Tiberium Alliances?Tiger Sora said:
Either way, the reason I enjoyed Command and Conquer so much was for the campy acting and the, at least to me, enjoyable storylines. More Billy Dee Williams; less e-sport silliness.
Mmmnope, Generals actually did really well, many people bought it, and it was a solid enjoyable game, with a great expansion to it as well.evilneko said:
As for the news, it's devastating. If it cost money I wouldn't buy it, but since it's free I'll try it just out of curiosity and to quite possibly laugh my ass off at EA's concept of a "F2P model", right when I assume they will be asking you to pay 10$ to increase your maximum unit size and stomp non-paying players. This game is doomed, because it's a F2P game by EA, and because you can't make a better online RTS than SC2 without putting in the required time, money and effort.
A series made popular by single player campaigns with campy cinematics and B-movie plots gets a sequel with no single player campaign whatsoever? Yeah... I'll be skipping this one, and I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one...
EDIT: Also, it's supposed to be F2P and focused on e-sports? I sure hope they understand that you can't do a F2P with Pay-to-win and hope for any chance at e-sport recognition. Oh who am I kidding, it's EA, they have purged the last of their common sense years ago...
EDIT: Also, it's supposed to be F2P and focused on e-sports? I sure hope they understand that you can't do a F2P with Pay-to-win and hope for any chance at e-sport recognition. Oh who am I kidding, it's EA, they have purged the last of their common sense years ago...
Well it's funny as soon as EA made the game multiplayer only a poll popped up on the EA forums asking which was most important singleplayer or multiplayer and singleplayer is pretty much wrecking at this point. I won't post the link but feel free to check it out if you are ok with entering the unholy lair of EA.
No, people were expecting the game to be similar enough to the previous titles that they enjoyed to be worth getting.Suki_ said:
EA may as well have made an entirely new I.P for what they are doing to this, but we all know the only reason they aren't is in the hope that the name convinces people to play it.
As long as they keep their grubby F2P/Multiplayer-only hands away from Red Alert and get rid of the team responsible for C&C4 I'll let them fuck up Generals, but they start this shit with regular C&C or Red Alert and the gloves come off.
Also, I'm curious as to who in EA thought that it was still a good idea to let this studio call themselves 'Bioware'. Before the whole ME3 shitstorm it was an understandable dick move to pull on people, now it just seems like they're trying to shoot the studio in the foot.
Also, I'm curious as to who in EA thought that it was still a good idea to let this studio call themselves 'Bioware'. Before the whole ME3 shitstorm it was an understandable dick move to pull on people, now it just seems like they're trying to shoot the studio in the foot.
What made the originals great? Strange, I seem to remember hammy acting and fun single player missions. Too bad you won't get any of that now, because EA has their yearly 'franchises we have to ruin' quota to meet.
Oh, and once they're done with Generals 2, it's on to Tiberium and Red Alert? Tiberium is ruined as ruined can be with C&C 4, but Red Alert too? RA3 wasn't that great (personally), but why destroy it further?
I miss Westwood.
Oh, and once they're done with Generals 2, it's on to Tiberium and Red Alert? Tiberium is ruined as ruined can be with C&C 4, but Red Alert too? RA3 wasn't that great (personally), but why destroy it further?
I miss Westwood.
As much as I loved the old series. I for one don't mind this idea. I wish they'd do BOTH. But I must have been one of the few who never played the campaigns, they felt like extended tutorials. I always went straight to the skirmishes.
Well, it looks like I'll be driving my pyromaniac friend up to Bioware's offices. Again. Seriously, if anyone's going to be pissed about this, it's going to be him. He loves the single player campaigns of that series to death. He hated Mass Effect 3's ending. And he's been able to rig a flamethrower out of household scrap materials. You don't want to see him pissed. And this will definitely make him pissed.
OK then. One less game I need to follow I suppose. Shame really.
The older C&C titles are among my favorites of all time. And while I indulged in an occasional online bout here or there, I can tell you one thing for sure. A friggin story WAS integral to the brand. It's kinda what that brand is about in my opinion.
Storyline is as important to C&C as tanks or bullets or menus. It's just part of the experience. Of course after the abortion that was "C&C 4" I can't say I'm surprise. Hurt. But not surprised. This is horrible news.
The older C&C titles are among my favorites of all time. And while I indulged in an occasional online bout here or there, I can tell you one thing for sure. A friggin story WAS integral to the brand. It's kinda what that brand is about in my opinion.
Storyline is as important to C&C as tanks or bullets or menus. It's just part of the experience. Of course after the abortion that was "C&C 4" I can't say I'm surprise. Hurt. But not surprised. This is horrible news.
That's like buying an icecream and throwing away the icecream to eat the dry, flavourless cone first. It'd be alright if you'd played the campaign first and let the metaphorical icecream of plot, setting and characters run down it a little and add flavour but on its own I can't see the appeal.Mouse_Crouse said:
This a million times. They were awful coders (so many bits of broken code in Red Alert 2 that don't crash it because the bad outputs go to another bit of bad code that just drops it) but much better game designers.
Red Alert 3 was awful though, it had no real bearing on the other two games and took the campy aspects of the series to 11 without taking the dark aspects too. In the original it was only funny how hammy the soviet commander's address to the Player before mission 1 is because the actor was talking casually about nerve gas results the second before, commenting that it took children 30 seconds to die and adults 45. Now this darkness isn't constant, there are a lot of things are just funny (Stalin's mistress is also his chief of intelligence) but it's not just all crazy, there is a pinch or two of reality in the Red alert soup, not just six pints of kooky and a few pairs of silicone tits.
Also, the unit design was stupid, the options were limited and the whole thing felt streamlined into this stupid "e-sports" mentality. Games become e-sports because they have gameplay that is high quality and requires skill, not because you cut down the unit roster to the bare bones and put out videos with some guys you hired acting like sports announcers to game replays.
