Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Red Alert 3?

Lasakon

Liturgist
Joined
Jun 21, 2004
Messages
219
Location
Klamath Falls,Oregon
Apparently so. Although C&C Generals was somewhat disappointing, I just can't help but be excited about a new Red Alert.
 

Human Shield

Augur
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Messages
2,027
Location
VA, USA
I liked to Tiberium apocalypse setting better, wish they finally made a third one in that series. I want to see Kain and Nod along with the GDI duke it out again.
 

Otaku_Hanzo

Erudite
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
3,463
Location
The state of insanity.
Tiberian Sun was definitely the best in the CnC series, followed by Red Alert 2. I too would love to see a third installment in the Tiberian saga. Hopefully they do a better job with RA3 then they did with Generals.
 

Andyman Messiah

Mr. Ed-ucated
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,933
Location
Narnia
Never >really< did like the Red Alert-series. C&C got good with Tiberian Sun. I felt it had a strange Falloutie setting going on, only with a bit more americana muscles.

Anyway, good news. I'll go and stick it on the toilet wall.
 

Jinxed

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
901
Location
Special Encounter
Otaku_Hanzo said:
Tiberian Sun was definitely the best in the CnC series, followed by Red Alert 2. I too would love to see a third installment in the Tiberian saga. Hopefully they do a better job with RA3 then they did with Generals.

I disagree. It was the one I couldn't get into at all. I loved the music in part 1, I don't recall it being too good in TS. The graphics were weird and the animation even weirder, those cyborgs were lame and the game was initially unbalanced. At that time I lacked internet access so I sold it to my friend.

Generals had me going for a while, but I lost interest later..

Funny that, I've been playing Dune 2 on DOS BOX for a few days and I'm playing Emperor now. Avoiding that shortcut method of rushing the AI's base.
 

Mendoza

Liturgist
Joined
Sep 24, 2004
Messages
277
The original C&C has always been my favorite, although Tiberian Sun was a lot of fun. I never really got into the Red Alert games. I've always prefered th Blizzard RTS's to Westwood's (or whoever they are now).
 

Spazmo

Erudite
Joined
Nov 9, 2002
Messages
5,752
Location
Monkey Island
I never did play Tiberian Sun. I probably ought to, if only for the FMVs. Anyways, if they just make Generals with commies, it'll be pretty awful.
 

Sol Invictus

Erudite
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Messages
9,614
Location
Pax Romana
I've seen a photograph of this game in play from one of EA's exhibits, and it looks like the game is going to use the awful Generals engine. I can't say I'm terribly excited about it.
 

Lasakon

Liturgist
Joined
Jun 21, 2004
Messages
219
Location
Klamath Falls,Oregon
It's using yet another updated version of the SAGE engine which was also just used for The Battle of Middle Earth RTS they just finished.
 

Flink

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 17, 2002
Messages
220
Location
Tarant
Tiberian Sun was utter sheit. Unbalanced as hell and the cheesiest FMV's ever made for a game. Oh sure, they where cheesy in RA as well, but at least there they where aware of it and had some fun with it.

I'm no big fan of the Generals engine either. It doesn't look like complete ass, but takes up way too much of my system's resources for the kind of graphics it displays. WC3 looks a lot better and runs fine on my laptop, can't say the same for Generals.

Battles in Generals and indeed in most of the C&C games are way too fast paced for my liking. I want micro management, not just throwing tons of tanks at each other and watch em explode in a matter of seconds. That's why I prefer Blizzard's games and more recently Dawn of War. The Battles in WC3 and Dawn of War last a long time allowing lots of nice micro. And they're a lot more entertaining to watch as well.

C&C games also suffer from having Mammoth Tanks (or equivalents) units that don't have any weaknesses.
 

Jinxed

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
901
Location
Special Encounter
Except being uber expensive and slow? At least that's how I remember it from the original C&C.

In Dune 2, the devastator was not so good, it was very expensive, and slow like a motherfucker. Not worth it at all. Not all that bad for defense though.
 

Dark Elf

Erudite
Joined
Mar 3, 2004
Messages
1,617
Location
Sweden
Oh, I still get moist when I think of all the sweet time we used to spend with Yuri's Revenge.

'The Apocalypse has begun'

'It will soon be a wasteland'

:cool:
 

Fez

Erudite
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
7,954
Jinxed said:
Except being uber expensive and slow? At least that's how I remember it from the original C&C.

In Dune 2, the devastator was not so good, it was very expensive, and slow like a motherfucker. Not worth it at all. Not all that bad for defense though.

The devestator could be fun to use on suicide bombing runs. The sonic tank was the best in swarms though. The deviator was just evil. I think the Nuke was to make up for the devestator not being the uber tank you might expect, that and having the coolest advisor out of the three.
 

The Exar

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
259
Location
Smoldering Corpse Bar
A friend of mine realy likes C&C. His favorite game - Red Alert 2. BUT after Westwoods dead he rejected to play C&C: Generals because it wasn't developed by WW but by EA! Isn't that stupid?
And now RA3. Somewhere I read that the game'll be developed by the same crew who created RA2. Is that true?
 

Jinxed

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
901
Location
Special Encounter
The Exar said:
A friend of mine realy likes C&C. His favorite game - Red Alert 2. BUT after Westwoods dead he rejected to play C&C: Generals because it wasn't developed by WW but by EA! Isn't that stupid?
And now RA3. Somewhere I read that the game'll be developed by the same crew who created RA2. Is that true?

If you happened to check out that link Lasakon posted. They say that they also created Generals. While I like RA2, I have no love for Generals.
 

The Exar

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
259
Location
Smoldering Corpse Bar
Jinxed said:
If you happened to check out that link Lasakon posted. They say that they also created Generals. While I like RA2, I have no love for Generals.
Thanks for the info. I'll tell my friend. Preharps he'll play Generals at last. :D
 

z3r'0'

Liturgist
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
211
Location
the namib desert
Lost Hope

Grampybone says, EA be full of da eeviil spirits o' GREED. Only fools haves hopes for 'em.

Dhey smells too!
 

Stainless

Novice
Joined
Dec 11, 2004
Messages
39
I always enjoyed the futuristic setting of CnC (orcas = win), although I found the RA games to be more fun playing against mates. Probibly because in a multiplayer CnC TD game, computer AI was limited to giving them a dozen units at the start and watching them rush one poor bastard.

Generals sucked, although I did have alot of fun playing in against mates over LAN. I also felt that Generals allowed for more rat-tactics then most others, but in the end it feels like the game is a made rush to get a super weapon pumping.
 

Ellester

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 27, 2004
Messages
162
Location
ohio
Well since I liked RA2 quite a lot, so I’m interested. Just don’t make it such a resource hog like Generals. We play a lot of multiplayer games over our network after work, and Generals couldn’t run on half of our machines, so we scrapped the idea. Sucked too, because we put in a few hundred games of RA2 and Yuri and were pumped for Generals. But, then again we were in our Counterstrike phase (or obsession), so I doubt we would have given Generals much of a chance, anyway.
 

xemous

Arcane
Joined
Aug 6, 2004
Messages
1,107
Location
AU
generals was by far the most balanced and best in the series. you should give it a try online, its single player game is a joke but.
 

Greenskin13

Erudite
Joined
Dec 5, 2002
Messages
1,109
Location
Chicago
Is that the CIA again?

My one problem with Generals was that the GLA played just like a regular army, instead of an underground band of terrorists/freedom fighters. I would have prefered it if they played with much more unorthadoxy, such as all their units appear as civilians unless fighting or discovered by a Chinese or American special unit. And the GLA buildings wouldn't just be built, but instead would require a civilian building to act as a front. This would require a more dynamic civilian AI, where they actually move around the map actively and build civilian buildings. And there would also have to be consequences for the Chinese and the American to be flagrantly shooting civies and blowing up their homes and offices.

Of course, this would all be a really far leap from the C&C formula, so I can see why the designers would make the GLA a more standard army.
 

Jinxed

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
901
Location
Special Encounter
If you take a close look at generals it's nothing different from what we have already seen years ago. Nothing, damn, even that graphics are worse and there's no real story at all.

Generals is only good if that's the game you start your RTS experience with.
 

Lady Armageddona

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 7, 2004
Messages
180
Location
in the middle of hell
I quite liked all Westwood titles in the C&C series. Never bothered with Generals, though, I though It was just EA being arses and cashing on the C&C of it.
Never liked this SAGE either, I always say that graphics is not the whole of a game, so I am not going to bother with BfME, also.
I may tryout RA3, however, but since it is done by the EALA and these days nobody knows who is doing what at that studio, since they are also behind Medal of Horor : Pasific Assault. +
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom