Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums: General Discussion

Home » General Discussions » General Discussion » What should C&C3 have been?

Show: Today's Messages :: Polls :: Message Navigator

Re: What should C&C3 have been? [message #420704 is a reply to message #420573]

Tue, 23 February 2010 16:57

[NE]Fobby[GEN]
Messages: 1377
Registered: July 2004
Location: Canada

Karma:

General (1 Star)

I fully agree with R3 on this one. When I was originally invited for the alpha testing, I thought I knew what I was getting into: crawlers instead of bases, etc. I didn't like that version, and as the game evolved into the private beta and then the public beta, I found myself disliking the game more and more.

C&C4 is following the path of other mainstream RTS games, which have been simplified greatly to attract FPS, RPG, and casual gamer fanbases. The game is void of tactical and strategic play. You basically choose which class you want (Offense, Defense, Support) and each class can only build one type of unit (infantry, vehicle, aircraft). Since this is the case, it forces you to work together with your teammates. There are several problems with this:

a) Several teammates can choose the same class

b) There's almost always a teammate that leaves at the beginning of the game and therefore successfully screwing you over

c) There's almost always a teammate that leaves in the middle of the game

d) Teammates almost never work together the way EA assumed

So the multiplayer basically feels like "every man for himself".

If you play a 1 on 1, what ends up happening is that one player destroys the Crawler of the other player a few minutes into the game. Since the population caps are increased in a 1v1, the winning player can go ahead and unit spam, build up a huge army, and practically "spawnkill" enemy Crawlers until he wins.

On top of that, the gameplay is not fast and fluid, but instead slow paced and boring. It feels like everything has double the health it should have, and battles that would've taken 30 seconds in an older C&C game end up taking a few minutes of you looking at the screen waiting for something to die.

My biggest complaint is the mere simplicity of everything. Build units, and take over outposts. Its like Battlefield's conquest mode, except in the form of an RTS, which is dull and repetitive. I feel like I'm playing "whack a mole" without the excitement of wamming that hammer against the plastic mole.

So not only is C&C4 a big discourse from traditional C&C games, I find it downright boring altogether, C&C or not.

IMO.

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/937/gdinod.jpg

Unreal Tournament 3 Total Conversion to C&C: Renegade
Check out Renegade X Today!

Mod Wars Veteran

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		What should C&C3 have been? By: GEORGE ZIMMER on Mon, 22 February 2010 16:14
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: [NE]Fobby[GEN] on Mon, 22 February 2010 16:35
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: zeratul on Mon, 22 February 2010 16:46
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: GEORGE ZIMMER on Mon, 22 February 2010 16:48
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: terminator 101 on Mon, 22 February 2010 19:00
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: Spoony on Wed, 24 February 2010 06:24
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: [NE]Fobby[GEN] on Mon, 22 February 2010 17:01
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: Lone0001 on Mon, 22 February 2010 17:32
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: nope.avi on Mon, 22 February 2010 18:35
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: R315r4z0r on Mon, 22 February 2010 18:39
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: Lone0001 on Mon, 22 February 2010 19:55
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: DRNG on Mon, 22 February 2010 19:04
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: R315r4z0r on Mon, 22 February 2010 20:49
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: Gen_Blacky on Mon, 22 February 2010 21:07
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: nopol10 on Tue, 23 February 2010 03:18
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: DRNG on Tue, 23 February 2010 05:53
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: Zion on Tue, 23 February 2010 03:12
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: R315r4z0r on Tue, 23 February 2010 08:59
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: nopol10 on Tue, 23 February 2010 16:32
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: R315r4z0r on Tue, 23 February 2010 17:04
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: HaTe on Tue, 23 February 2010 17:35
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: [NE]Fobby[GEN] on Tue, 23 February 2010 16:57
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: GEORGE ZIMMER on Wed, 24 February 2010 06:57
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: [NE]Fobby[GEN] on Wed, 24 February 2010 21:44
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: cmatt42 on Wed, 24 February 2010 22:31
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: Tiesto on Wed, 24 February 2010 07:02
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: R315r4z0r on Wed, 24 February 2010 11:52
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: Spoony on Wed, 24 February 2010 12:12
		Re: What should C&C3 have been? By: R315r4z0r on Wed, 24 February 2010 13:03

Previous Topic:	Renegade-X: Nod Invasion on Hourglass :)
Next Topic:	wrong phone calls

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Tue Aug 13 02:49:51 MST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00945 seconds