Tiberium Wars review, Spoilers inside, you have been warned! Options

[Sir Modsalot]

I made a mistake ignoring this, and have a few things to address.

First: Saying C&C3 is just an upgraded Generals, this is just a huge mistake. Yes, they used SAGE. No, it's NOT the same SAGE that Gens/ZH had. Gens/ZH used an unrefined version of the engine; in fact if I recall correctly Gens was actually a public TEST of the engine. It's a very flexible system, you can see this in C&C3 and the SAGE in C&C3 is in NO way the same as in Gens/ZH. Second part of the mistake is that Gens/ZH didn't follow any previous storylines. EA actually attempted to link C&C3 with the previous "Tiberian" games, that's another major difference.

Second: Tore said the Mammoth tank/Predator in C&C3 are weaker than previous incarnations. Unupgraded, yes. Give them rail guns, and they're almost TOO powerful (even with the balance fixes in 1.05; decreasing ROF and INcreasing firepower for the upgraded Mammoth Tank wasn't very smart on their behalf IMO).

Third: Poskov said the movies were "all un-Westwood like". Well, of course they were, WW didn't play any part in the making of the game (since, you know, WW isn't really around anymore anyway). How can you expect consistency on this level from EA?

Fourth: Wess said that "Nod has changed to much from a real army to a rebel one". When were they ever a real army? The new designs make them look like organized, devoted fanatics (you even saw this element in TS/FS where they refer to the commanders as the "Inner Circle", and the cheers Nod soldiers did praising Kane and Nod).

Fifth: Walls/gates. Who has ever used either of these online? Seriously. Sure, I wall in my CY in all situations, but that's it. Walling in a base costs too much and for online purposes is impractical.

Sixth: Firestorm walls. Though this wasn't mentioned much in this topic, I feel it needs to be addressed as well. Simple 3-part reason I could see for omitting them; power drain, money drain, and they only work for so long, all three to keep things balanced, but they also make it ineffective. 250 per section? 2000 for the generator? Who-knows-how-much power to keep all these running? And they only work when the shield is charged and you have power. It was a good concept but, as with walls/gates, wasn't practical online. How EA would have approached this is beyond me, but we could only imagine. It was better off being omitted.

That's all for now as far as counterpoints. But I will say this: evil ol' EA went outta their way to continue the C&C franchise, be glad they did and enjoy the game for what it is if you have it. If you don't like it, don't play it; if you bought it and don't like it, return it. That's money EA loses. If you don't have it, you have no right to complain about it if you don't like any part of it (not directed toward anybody that's posted in here, I'm just saying). What EA-haters keep forgetting is that Petroglyph LIKED C&C3 and what EA did with it. You know? Petro? Some of the employees of which helped START the franchise? Yeah. Finally, for those that say "OMG EA RUINED C&C!!!11one!", well, guess what, people like you ruined it. In fact, the best way to say it is, the Internet ruined it. It's not perfect, but EA could have easily decided not to make it and leave us with Generals/ZH. Thanks for reading all this, I guess.

This post has been edited by Sir Modsalot: Jun 3 2007, 11:34 AM

[Nod Strike]

Wow, that post... has sort of made me rethink the viewpoint.

[Bittah Commander]

@Sir Modsalot:
Not all petroglyph staff members share the same opinion. Here's Ishmael's opinion on this matter:

It's interesting that this game appears to be a remake of TS. It's as if they're just ignoring TS and making their own new game in the same time period. Nice to see the Juggernaut... since when did black hand carry flamethrowers? Oh well.

Great looking maps, great unit animations on troops, fun to see video come back with a great cast, nice UI updates from the RA2 UI (although where the heck is a "ready to place" tab?), nice Ion Cannon effect.

Plays just like Generals in many respects. Units aren't that creative given the rich universe to work with. Mini-supers are right from Generals (FAB anyone?). GDI and Nod feel way too similar. High-end units on both sides pretty much win the game. Nod's units are slightly better since they're faster and easier to crush infantry with while destroying a base.

And the GDI Commando's voice... blech.

And yay that Zone Troopers (in environmentally sealed armor) are immune to Tiberium but yet not immune to the hallucinogenic bombs tossed by the Nod troop commander... yeah that makes sense. No feedback when your troops are mind-controlled, either.

Overall, I'm looking forward to playing the Solo-play for the campaign.

So even Ishmael says it plays like Generals and also thinks that too much from TS is being ignored. Basicly he likes the looks of it and looks forward to playing the campaign (which I can already tell you, will be a disappointment; I started playing the campaign with an open mind myself, but was disappointed as well).

[Crash]

I agree with everything Bittah said. Still TW isn't a real C&C, and thus not C&C

This post has been edited by Crash-King: Jun 3 2007, 07:30 PM

[Sir Modsalot]

I DO consider it a C&C because EA actually attempted to continue the series and utilize its elements. They didn't do the best job, of course, but they gave it a shot and you gotta give them that much.

Not all petroglyph staff members share the same opinion. Here's Ishmael's opinion on this matter:

So even Ishmael says it plays like Generals and also thinks that too much from TS is being ignored. Basicly he likes the looks of it and looks forward to playing the campaign (which I can already tell you, will be a disappointment; I started playing the campaign with an open mind myself, but was disappointed as well).

I wouldn't expect them to all share the same ideas, I was just saying that Petro in general liked it.

[Bittah Commander]

In general you say? For as far as I can tell the ones that played (though I actually don't know of any of the petro staff that played it) it are just being nice and the ones that haven't think the graphics look pretty... That still doesn't say anything.

Anyway, whether Petroglyph likes it or not really doesn't matter... Some even liked Red Alert 2 and some even liked Generals, but that doesn't make either of those games a real C&C.

The way I see it, what defines a (real) C&C is whether the story of "the game in question" is part of the C&C story (since C&C is in my opinion really the name of the story the games are based on; whatever comes after "C&C" in the name of the game is the actual name of the game and/or the name of the chapter of the C&C story). When a game fails to properly connect to the C&C story, it's not a (real) C&C (it's just named C&C by the developers, but it's not part of the original C&C story). In that case it really doesn't matter whether EA attempted to continue the story; I don't buy anything for attempts. EA "attempted", but failed.

When I attempt to build a real car and fail, whatever I built isn't a car. You might be able to [i]call[i/] the junk I created a car, but since it can't do the things a car can do (drive...), it really isn't a car. The fact it partly looks like a car doesn't make it a car either.

So... What EA made could be called a C&C (since that's what they named it), but it really isn't (since it lacks the properties that defines a C&C).

[Sir Modsalot]

Well, they tried to make it a real C&C. I'll give them that much.

[Bittah Commander]

In my opinion EA was too stubborn and did too much their own way, which is why it failed to be a real C&C. EA disliked TS, so they pretty much ignored it; like Ishmael said, it's more like they remade TS.

[harbringer]

woah, somethings gotten up crashkings ass... the game itself i found, in fairness to EA, to be true to the cnc universe. hell, they even made it more realistic. so what if they took out the mmk2? it was slow and way too strong. so what if there are no walls, they compensated by making it so that there are few entrances to your base, which you can protect with turrets. the "new" obelisks in ts, were in my opinion, horrible. they looked like birds hunched over. the older ones fit in much better with nods sleek, dark architecture. and how can anyone say that the mammoth tanks are weaker? they still have the dual cannons, the anti air missile launchers and on top of that, you can give 'em railguns. who in their right mind doesnt? the new units make much more sense. so nod had two subterranean units. wowee. TWO. that obviously means that nod "specialised" in that field. and just because gdi got one, singular amphibious unit doesnt mean that they specialised anymore than nod. IMO, general apc's make much more sense. tick tanks were stupid and weak, and did not fit in with nods sleekness at all. nod still has stealth and flamethrowers and gdi still has railguns and orcas. freakin' whoopdeedoo. the acting was good, for a game, and they got actual actors this time. Battlestar Galactica stars, Lost stars, Starship Troopers stars, etc. and what did ts get? B class crap. the scrin are overpowered, but THEYRE ALIENS, they are millenia ahead of the humans. of course theyre going to have uber lasers and teleportation.

learn to review mate...

[Bittah Commander]

You obviously don't like Tiberian Sun. Still, whether or not you like it, it doesn't change the fact that C&C3 is supposed to be a sequel to TS but fails to be one. The fact you hate TS makes it easy (or even encourages you) to ignore anything from C&C3 that isn't continuous.

Yes, C&C3 might have had "real" actors this time, but who they are doesn't matter; how they act does. In their movies they might've acted very well, but in C&C3 they just didn't. Any acting by any actor (whether it's in the FMV's or the speeches of the units) was way too exaggerated and thus childish. The fact it's like any single of Nod's units is a prophet might be something you like, so you'll probably defend it... Still, it's childish and not realistic. If -in reality- I(as a commander) would contact a harvester and tell it to harvest some tiberium field, I don't need to hear how he feels about it, how the tiberium crystals glow, how tiberium is the future or whatever (unless it's relevant of course); all I need to know is that I'm understood and the driver of the harvester will comply. It wouldn't be a problem if it was one or two units that spoke more than needed (like a commando for instance), but in C&C3 it's about any single unit.
It is indeed something that might seem to be cool to some in the game, but it's not realistic and really childish.

You just can't deny the fact that C&C3 almost completely ignored the technology from TS (note I said almost). Even Adam Isgreen (in case you didn't know, a former Westwood employee) made this comment. Just like he said, it's almost as if they remade TS (so C&C3 replaces TS as a sequel to the first C&C). I know you hate TS, so you'll probably love this. It bothers me, but I admit that if EA would've said they'd be making C&C3 as a sequel to TD instead of TS, it would have bothered me a lot less.

[harbringer]

aaaaaaaaagh!! you completely misunderstood me! i love ts! i just think that the games dont have to be exact clones of themselves to be good. you immediately judged my likes, so i will yours. you, and most other people here, thought that cnc 3 would be crap. in fact, so did i. ea have screwed up enough anyhow. but thats not the point. the game rocks. ea took the time to make all those little details, like hiring good actors, who did act well, and recording different voice tracks for every unit. would you love the game if every time you selected a unit of infantry, they droned in a computer generated voice, and said exactly the same thing every single time? im sure (as we're all about making prejudiced judgings here) that youd love it if they got a couple of brain dead zombies to say 'yes' repeatedly, and they used that for every sinlge unit. unless you havent noticed, ts does it too. as does every single other strategy game in the world! and while we're at it, the game isnt realistic. yes, it is set on earth, and yes, there are people there, but there are aliens, and tiberium. oh, and im sure youd love a mod, where every side used 'realistic' weapons, and 'realistic' voice tracks, ie: the same. wow, instead of railguns, we should have machine guns. for everyone? is that how you'd like it? and im sure, if a meteor filled with tiberium did, land in the middle of italy, then a load of people would start a world war about it. thats realism. the game is different, thats what makes it better. dont get me wrong, i love ts. i played it for years. heck, after tomb raider, ts is my first gaming memory. i played it a lot, and to hear you say that about me, makes me sick.

you cant know anything, about me. dont even try to judge me, or anyone else. just cause you, and a bunch of other guys are diehard game fans, then it doesnt mean the game is bad. wowee, a remake. cause nobody else has ever done that.

[Sir Modsalot]

tick tanks were stupid and weak, and did not fit in with nods sleekness at all.

Weak? If you deploy them they get much better armor (so much so that the MMK2's railgun's warhead isn't very effective). Their cannon works quite well, too, almost as well as the Titan's cannon. Their design isn't as sleek and Nod-ish as the other units Nod had, but hey, it's a tank that buries half of itself in the ground. What're you gonna do?

the acting was good, for a game, and they got actual actors this time. Battlestar Galactica stars, Lost stars, Starship Troopers stars, etc. and what did ts get? B class crap.

What? The acting in TS (AND FS) was just freakin' awesome. Like Bittah said, it doesn't matter who acts, it's how they act.

This post has been edited by Sir Modsalot: Jun 10 2007, 10:10 PM

[Crash]

From what you wrote there, you prove yourself as inmature. The actors do not play good at all. Kane never called you "my son" in TS, you're not his son or slave, whatever. You're just a commander. The music doesn't have a quiet, or action packed style, it sounds like a zombie execution ritual thing. EA rushed the hell out of Westwood, making them finish TS half way finished, they made it worse. And then they took the title "Command & Conquer Red Alert 2" and told us it was the sequel to Red Alert 1, it doesn't have ANYTHING saying that it's a part of the C&C universe, because these are supposed to be connected. Also Bittah Commander said that there are things that show that WWII happened in RA2, thus being a plothole. Also they came up with the game "Command & Conquer Generals" Which had NOTHING, and I repeat NOTHING with C&C at all. Back to C&C 3, The name doesn't have any thing related to tiberium, there were no real envolving in technology or tiberium. Nothing special, etc. The selection voices "Down with GDI" are made to be cool, but they're childish, also they included the ugly scorpion tank from generals. The most okay unit with the whole game is the GDI engineer. You have no different choices in skirmish mode, no ion storms, no explosive blue tiberium (I didn't see atleast), no veins, no fona, no cabal, no forgotten etc. The ion cannon is just wierd, and what happened to the multi missile? The chemical missile? The use of tiberium weapons went back. There were supposed to be new exciting technologies. And don't you dare to say that the technology became impractical, you know it's a lie. There's no way you'd go back if the technology was impractical, you'd research on better technology.

woah, somethings gotten up crashkings ass

..... Explain us everything they did and why! And also tell a way everything lead into Tiberium wars!
Think twice before saying something! WHY did it fit better with a land based APC than a water one for GDI for example?

This post has been edited by Crash-King: Jun 10 2007, 10:17 PM

[Sir Modsalot]

EA rushed the hell out of Westwood, making them finish TS half way finished, they made it worse.

And the game still turned out to be pretty damn good.

And then they took the title "Command & Conquer Red Alert 2" and told us it was the sequel to Red Alert 1, it doesn't have ANYTHING saying that it's a part of the C&C universe, because these are supposed to be connected. Also Bittah Commander said that there are things that show that WWII happened in RA2, thus being a plothole.

RA2 followed up the storyline from RA1. I know that RA1 was supposed to lead into the tiberium universe, but RA2 I would think is set between the 2 storylines. They ignored the tiberium part, I know, but who cares? It followed up nicely IMO even without that detail.

Also they came up with the game "Command & Conquer Generals" Which had NOTHING, and I repeat NOTHING with C&C at all.

OK, so what? It was a public test of SAGE that somehow became wildly popular. Get over it.

Back to C&C 3, The name doesn't have any thing related to tiberium, there were no real envolving in technology or tiberium. Nothing special, etc. The selection voices "Down with GDI" are made to be cool, but they're childish

You want to go back to having generic selection voices dispersed to every vehicle like in TS? For the infantry this shows Nod is enthusiastic about GDI's defeat even in combat. I like it.

also they included the ugly scorpion tank from generals.

They did? Where? The Scorpion is in no way the same as the one in Generals.

You have no different choices in skirmish mode, no ion storms, no explosive blue tiberium (I didn't see atleast), no veins, no fona, no cabal, no forgotten etc.

No Ion Storms is a good thing. WW didn't utilize the storms that much, just enough to create a couple of missions with you strategizing around the storms. No explosive blue crystals? So what? It probably became less volatile over the years. No veins? That one can't really be explained, but they aren't needed since Nod went back to nukes. No CABAL or forgotten? Errr... if you remember right, GDI deciphered the tacitus at the end of Firestorm, and even at the end of TS, they had a serum of some kind that Umagon said "could save my people". The mutation effect on the forgotten had probably been reversed and then they became normal humans. No fona? Not needed. Tiberium spreads even without trees/fona, the Firestorm manual explains this. And CABAL... I know EA didn't seem to pay attention to the end of Firestorm, but even if CABAL could have come back from its defeat, it wouldn't have enough power to compete against GDI/Nod/Scrin.

The ion cannon is just wierd, and what happened to the multi missile? The chemical missile? The use of tiberium weapons went back.

So? The Ion Cannon matches (well, exceeds) the power of Nod's nuke. You wanna know what EA would have done if they'd kept the multi/chem missile? I sure as hell don't. Going back to nukes was a wise choice.

There were supposed to be new exciting technologies. And don't you dare to say that the technology became impractical, you know it's a lie. There's no way you'd go back if the technology was impractical, you'd research on better technology.

There IS new and exciting tech. It's called the Scrin. Nothing really new and exciting for GDI and Nod? So what? They went back to basics, it's probably better off being that way. Get over it.

This post has been edited by Sir Modsalot: Jun 10 2007, 10:35 PM

[Crash]

It's way too easy to say "get over it" as a reason. I'm over it, I just can't stand your reasoning, makes no sence, I KNOW we won't be seeing some advanced technology in 2030 and then the technology these days in 2047, unreal. Also, think how good TS could be.... There should be new techology for everyone, the scrin is a different new side, so that's not a new technology, it has been theirs for a long time probably. Also it's far too simple to just reason it "so what?" it makes the game less fun, point.

This post has been edited by Crash-King: Jun 10 2007, 10:58 PM

[Bittah Commander]

aaaaaaaaagh!! you completely misunderstood me! i love ts! i just think that the games dont have to be exact clones of themselves to be good. you immediately judged my likes, so i will yours. you, and most other people here, thought that cnc 3 would be crap. in fact, so did i. ea have screwed up enough anyhow. but thats not the point. the game rocks. ea took the time to make all those little details, like hiring good actors, who did act well, and recording different voice tracks for every unit. would you love the game if every time you selected a unit of infantry, they droned in a computer generated voice, and said exactly the same thing every single time? im sure (as we're all about making prejudiced judgings here) that youd love it if they got a couple of brain dead zombies to say 'yes' repeatedly, and they used that for every sinlge unit. unless you havent noticed, ts does it too. as does every single other strategy game in the world! and while we're at it, the game isnt realistic. yes, it is set on earth, and yes, there are people there, but there are aliens, and tiberium. oh, and im sure youd love a mod, where every side used 'realistic' weapons, and 'realistic' voice tracks, ie: the same. wow, instead of railguns, we should have machine guns. for everyone? is that how you'd like it? and im sure, if a meteor filled with tiberium did, land in the middle of italy, then a load of people would start a world war about it. thats realism. the game is different, thats what makes it better. dont get me wrong, i love ts. i played it for years. heck, after tomb raider, ts is my first gaming memory. i played it a lot, and to hear you say that about me, makes me sick.

you cant know anything, about me. dont even try to judge me, or anyone else. just cause you, and a bunch of other guys are diehard game fans, then it doesnt mean the game is bad. wowee, a remake. cause nobody else has ever done that.

In any of your posts comparing TS to C&C3, you always talk about TS in a negative way. It makes it appear you hate the game, so -very surprisingly- I did assume you did.
Now, I'm not judging C&C3 as a game right now (I'll do that in a minute), but as a sequel to TS, it has failed. Yes, voices in TS might have sounded repetitive, but at least it made the units appear a lot more serious and thus the game appeared a lot less childish than C&C3.
Especially with GDI units, when I select a unit I expect to hear a short line like "Orders?", "Sir?" or maybe even "Reporting for duty". For a professional soldier a line like "What do you have in mind, sir?" really doesn't fit. It's even worse when the units start bragging about themselves... Maybe if it was just 1 unit (which would most likely be the commando in that case), it would be acceptable (but if it'd be too exaggerated, -just like everything else in C&C3- it would still be very cheesy).
Now, with Nod units you might think this is very different... I disagree really. Nod started off like a faction similar to (though still a bit different) a terrorist faction. After a while Nod turned into a real world power and started acting like it and also a lot less like a terrorist faction. This is very noticeable in TS, but thrown completely out of the window in C&C3 (where they turned into a terrorist(-like) faction even more than they were in TD). In TS most (if not all) of Nod's units were just as professional as GDI's; they all had a military training (they weren't handed a weapon and sent into the field without (hardly) any training, just like it appears to have been done with some of Nod's units in C&C3) and thus the Nod units would address their superior the way they were taught during the training (in a professional and short way).

Continuity is the reason why C&C3 fails to be a sequel to TS, which might even be obvious to you. Just like Adam Isgreen said, it's like EA made C&C3 as an alternate sequel to TD instead of TS and if you pay attention -no matter how much you might love C&C3- this should be obvious to you too.

Just like Adam Isgreen said on the Petroglyph forums, EA is giving their own swing to C&C. It's obvious they didn't like TS (APOC almost said it literally) and they've tried to make C&C3 more like TD. Since C&C3 now belongs to them and none of their staff members was really involved with the C&C story, this just might have been the right thing to do for them (or they might end up not knowing certain things about their own story and make mistakes with the story -not like they haven't already with RA2-).

So, if you love C&C3, fine. However, stop denying that C&C3 fails to be a real sequel to TS.

I didn't agree with EA doing this, because it means that the actual C&C story no has a dead end. We'll really never know how the actual C&C story (Westwood Vegas') will end (unless Adam Isgreen gets on the Petroglyph forums one day when he has had too much to drink and spits it all out). However, for the reason I stated above (and I must admit, Adam Isgreen made me see that), this is the right thing for EA to do. However, I do disagree with the way EA is doing this. They're making up excuses for everything they're changing, which is really tearing their C&C story apart. Their C&C story is hardly solid anymore (especially if you include RA2, but let's not go there now) and reading all those excuses ("explanations") they stuffed in their so called database in C&C3 really irritates me. It's really like reading lies (really, those excuses hardly make any sense and even less because of the amount of in which they come).

So, to be perfectly honest, if EA would've just announced they would make an alternate sequel to Tiberian Dawn or something in that direction with their motivation behind it, I would have accepted it. The fact they're almost denying it is what mostly kept me from accepting it.


So now about C&C3 as a game...
I don't think it's too bad (I've played all campaign missions and had a couple online matches with Crashking and Morpher), but still, there's quite a few things I don't like about it.
Unit (and building) spamming is promoted way too much. The obvious cause for this would of course be the fact players are able to produce from multiple factories simultaneously. Westwood could have done the same with TS and probably even TD if they wanted to, but I'm actually pretty sure they left it out intentionally.
Petroglyph even appears to be discouraging players from spamming with UaW now by not having the camera zoomed out too far. It was explained that they noticed players playing the DOS version of C&C (TD) -which only has a very low resolution- players usually built a certain amount of units before they'd attack their opponent (about a certain percentage of the screen had to be filled). When the Windows version (which of course had a higher resolution) of C&C (TD) was released, the amount of units they players would build before attacking their opponent suddenly appeared to be higher (since the resolution which higher, obviously a higher amount of units fit in the percentage of the screen players would usually fill before attacking).
Now, whether you agree with this or not, it does make it obvious that they are really trying to do something against unit spamming in UaW and because of this I believe Westwood didn't allow players to produce from multiple factories simultaneously in any C&C for the same reason.

The unit spamming in C&C3 is really extreme if you ask me. It's almost like RTS stands for "Real Time Spam" instead of -Strategy in for C&C3. The only strategy in C&C3 is really unit spamming (and for newcomers to the RTS genre this is not a bad thing at all of course). Also, aside from the fact it takes away strategies, it also makes the game very chaotic.

[Crash]

Both ways to produce make sence, I prefer the orginal, since it makes you produce fast.
The non orginal one, will take long time to produce, but multiplie at one time. This makes unit spamming more used though.
The orginal one makes you choose which one to produce in while all other factories help it produce quicker.
I agree with everyting Bittah Commander says.

[Clazzy]

There's no point arguing really Modder, they're too stuck-up to admit that TW has any redeeming features and instead will just criticise every aspect. Just take solace in the fact that you and many other fans of the C&C community found it to be a good and enjoyable game despite its flaws. The people you're trying to rationalise with will argue to the ends of the earth that EA ruined C&C and that everything after TS should be ignored as a C&C because EA was too involved or WW wasn't involved. Even TD and TS don't line up perfectly (Why did Nod drop the perfectly good nuke for the crap multimissile? Why did visceroids COMPLETELY change over the space of twenty years? Why did both GDI and Nod use EVA in the first Tiberian War yet Nod were forced to steal an EVA unit in FS? Where did the technology for the Chem Sprayer's suit go? Why didn't trees mutate when exposed to tiberium in TS?) yet these flaws can happily be overlooked since both were made by WW.

[harbringer]

i should probably calm down... sorry about that...

anyhow, there are various things that people are overlooking here...

if, in reality, factories could only produce, from one facility, one unit at a time, world economy would crash. ts was original, yet the game engine probably couldnt keep up with five or six different "ready sir"s playing at once or something like that. it makes more sense this way.

EA, have a tendency to f*ck up everything they do. ever. or so goes the popular belief. i still like battlefield 2142, and i still like the rest of the battlefield series. and despite mixed reveiws, i played renegade online quite a lot. just because one section of EA messes up half the time, it doesnt mean that the rest of them do.

Mutants are still there. ever seen a mutant hovel?

it wouldnt make sense for cabal to still be there. Fs storyline was centered around his revolt, and downfall.

visceroids were cool, yet annoying.

chemical weapons are still there, in multiple different forms. vapour bombs, catalyst missile, seed tiberium, etc.

the ion cannon makes much more sense as a giant, all engulfing laser, than as a puny cant-even-destroy-a-frigging-war-factory-beam.

i dont care what anyone says, NOD is a cult. cultists are stereotypically crazy, and therefore, have charisma. expression isnt a bad thing is it? having said that, some GDI retorts are a little over the top. NOD have fanatics, theyre just really crazy about kane. as is everyone else. (except GDI)

RA2 sucked, and you know it. it seemed playful, and stupid. the lighting was never dark, and the models and weapons were over the top and stereotypical (soviets for example)

Nuke, or namby-pamby multi missile? id go for a nuke any day.

All, and i mean all, of nods units look sleek and stealthy, just like they should. their turrets look streamlined, the tanks, and their rotating bodies on the tracks look slick, and lasers are perfect for nod.

gdi looks rugged and vaguely old fashioned, as in their tech is more chunky and worn.

the scrin look just like i imagined them, and they are perfect as an all destroying/ all consuming species. what did you expect? theyre millenia ahead of humans.

why does everyone keep talking about generals? its got nothing to do with this topic. like it or hate it, it doesnt matter. if you really want to talk about it start a thread.

IMO, the acting in ts, and fs was good, but the actors were not well known. in tw, the acting was good, AND the actors were well known. EA took the time to hire some good guys this time. the videos are good quality, and believable. besides, youve gotta love the news guy.

Having said all that, there is one thing that bothered me. in the database, it states that GDI discontinued the MMK2 because it could be exploited by commandos. yet, they continued production of the juggernaut, as did nod the avatar...

[Bittah Commander]

So the Mutants hovel is added and suddenly C&C3 has mutants... There's only 1 type of mutant in the whole game which has a way too exaggerated appearance. The mutants have no input in the whole game and they aren't even a faction like they're supposed to be.
The Scrin really don't look like they're intelligent at all. Not even the engineer looks like it's intelligent (it's limbs wouldn't even allow it to take over a building).

The way EA does things is like "This looks cool, let's do it" and they don't think about whether it makes sense or elaborate on the background of it. The mutants in C&C3 might look cool, but they don't make sense at all. In my opinion the same goes for the Scrin really.

@Clazzy:
Yes, there are minor changes between TD and TS, but the amount in which they come is nothing compared to the changes between TS and TW.
The Visceroid was a lot less significant in TD than it was in TS. The Visceroid mutates from the guts of an ifantry that died from tiberium and in TS they really made the visceroid look like guts crawling around. Westwood just changed this and didn't claim this was evolution (it really wouldn't have made any sense at all in that case).
Westwood made the super weapons less effective because there's no fun being practically defeated after getting hit by 1 super weapon. It was never said where Nod got their nukes from in TD anyway... So Nod could have stolen them, meaning they would have a limited supply (Nod needed to steal the nukes before they could use them in C&C3 as well).
The EVA Nod used in TD was replaced by CABAL in TS; if Nod would still have the old EVA, it would be severely outdated.
I believe the Chem Sprayer's suit was only missing in TS because Westwood couldn't make the deadline EA gave them and thus didn't have time to put it in. Same goes for the animation of trees mutating into blossom trees when exposed to tiberium (this is no different from TD according to the story in TS however).

[Crash]

Yeah, I saw some mutants, they looked like burnt people. There was no story around them. About the TD-TS thing, they don't perfectly fit, I'll take that. Another thing to remember is EA's rushing on WW.

it wouldnt make sense for cabal to still be there. Fs storyline was centered around his revolt, and downfall.

What downfall? I clearly saw CABAL in a facility cloning or creating Kane.

TD-TS is a better line than TS-TW, they didn't go backwards in technology. The reason for Nod's eva steal is that in TS they used CABAL which was self controlled at that point. Therefore they stole the EVA unit from GDI as a replacement for CABAL. I don't know why they went over to a multi missile and removed the chemical soldiers, probably since it was more effective to have a multi missle. The chemical soldiers weren't that effective probably. These changes are rather smal compared to EA's change, they went far back in technology, you can't deny that.

[harbringer]

i cant deny that they went back in time, so to speak, yet having said that, i think it was for the better.

superweapons are called super- weapons for a reason. they destroy stuff in a way nothing else could.

everybody else may disagree with me here, but in ts, i really, really hated visceroids and ion storms. they annoyed the crap out of me.

and, even though the mutants, and cabal dont play a major role in this game, theres always expansion packs, and since its EA, an expansion pack is almost guaranteed...

wait a minute... if you think the game went back to basics, in td there were no mutants, was there?

oh, and bittah, the scrin are all commanded by that crazy node thing in the last gdi mission... they dont have to be smart.

This post has been edited by harbringer: Jun 11 2007, 10:55 AM

[Crash]

There's no reasoning why going back to TD, when a story is created, you can't end it on the most exciting point. Ok, if CABAL is included in the expansion pack, it's great and a few of their good things for C&C. In TS the storyline went extremely deep, and in TW it's not deep any more. If the ion storm and tiberium life forms annoyed you, fine, although it's the natrual way of envolving.

[harbringer]

i suppose the story wasnt that deep, but it was interesting nonetheless. anyhow, about ion storms. maybe the scrin were harnessing them? obviously they use them on their air forces, but maybe theyre the ones making them happen?

and on the topic of visceroids, i didnt like them, but one thing that would have been cool, if when a squad of riflemen ran through a tib field, then one of them turned into a visceroid and killed all the others? just a thought, that would be cool...

[Crash]

i suppose the story wasnt that deep, but it was interesting nonetheless. anyhow, about ion storms. maybe the scrin were harnessing them? obviously they use them on their air forces, but maybe theyre the ones making them happen?

and on the topic of visceroids, i didnt like them, but one thing that would have been cool, if when a squad of riflemen ran through a tib field, then one of them turned into a visceroid and killed all the others? just a thought, that would be cool...

Perhaps they were, but why wouldn't Ionstorms then happen in TW? Things that are cool aren't always the best; This is where EA fails hardcore, they think all their selection voices, etc. are cool. These games are story deep, Strategic, and action packed. (Atleast TS, TD and RA were)

This post has been edited by Crash-King: Jun 12 2007, 08:21 PM

[harbringer]

meh, maybe they just wanted to improve the game, make it easier to play y'know? the ion storms added interest (they made the game yellow and turned off your radar. whoopee ) but they added some depth to the game, fluff wise.

visceroids were cool, but you couldnt target them without ctrl clicking, and they were sort of too strong. but they again, added depth. and the visceroids in tw hardly count as visceroids, more a stupid special ability.

[eXit]

After reading the posts made, i really got fed up with the whining, not only here but everywhere on these forums. But since im posting in this topic i'm gonna make a few statements about the things mentioned here. Firstly, the Scrin. I dont really get why can't they be robotic and as Bittah said "Weapons themselves", if Scrin has such an advanced AI, then in my opinion wouldn't it be alot better if you just lose the "Weapon" and not the person behind the weapon. You can re-build a weapon easily, but you cant re-build a human-being. That way, they would preserve theyr race more effeciently and probably have more scientist type beings in theyr army, wich would result in faster advancement. Also, tell me a reason why shouldnt they have more advanced aerial units, i don't have to repeat this since Clazzy already made the statement i would use. Second, the Disc Throwers. Grenadiers are much more realistic IMO. Throwing a simple ball shaped grenade is alot more easier and has a lower chance to miss than a disc, creating an explosive disc is alot more harder also.
These statements are only based off this topic and i have more about the whole game. Also i agree with Clazzy, why dont you go and whine about the changes that were made creating TS? Would you like to have the EXACT same copy of TS just with better graphics? It's a break from the regular TS. I also noticed that you didn't like how they brought back the old features TD had, Mammoth tanks crushing bikes, flame tanks etc. in a new aspect, now i haven't seen anyone creating topics blaming TD haven't i?

[Crash]

The changes from TD to TS were natural made, this isn't the case with the changes from TS to TW. I mean, when you have a better technology, you don't go back. The story should be a lot better. I really trusted EA this time, they just made the game boring and it was (imo) pretty generals a like in the gameplay. In generals you are able to build in two factories at the same time for example. I think TD and TS were great, you still don't go more than 55 years in time and take the old technology there, would you? Does that seem real? I loved the mammoth really, but I still think they should take newer technology, because of the year 2047... I'd think the earth's technology today is almost better. The changes in TS were minimal and ok, plus they were natrual. The game felt like a real C&C. Which C&C3 doesn't. If you don't like our complains fine, we're just expressing our opinion like you

[eXit]

Yes, i know that every people has theyr own opinion, but the things you hate and create topics about are so minor things, wich actually could be a good thing but noo, you must destroy everything EA does. Nobodys forcing you to play it, and tell me, why didnt EA just go make Sims 3 or something and just abandon CnC. About the fact why they went back in time, maybe they felt the new technology they had weren't so effective? As i mentioned above the Disc Thrower-Grenadier concept, maybe they took back the old effective units and upgraded them? The Titan was cool, but it was far too complicated to act just like an ordinary tank. What does being a mech give it? Better movement over terrain? It was slow as it was. Tanks are cheaper, harder to hit, faster and also alot faster to make. It seems to me that you just hate EA not the game, and now you refuse to accept it as a CnC. Fine, nobodys forcing you to play it but atleast give EA some credit for atleast trying.

[Crash]

God, I don't hate EA, they don't make good Real time strategy games, I think many of you who think EA made a good cnc, overuse bad comments, I may have been too much on details yes. The main aspects of the game weren't as they should be. It's annoying having to argue with you Shall we stop there?