Tiberian Dawn featured in PC GAMER's "Long Play" Section, VERY Large Images, Sorry 56k'ers Options

[Creagor]

PCG Issue 169 - Christmas 2006
Tiberian Dawn has been featured in PC GAMER's "Long Play" Section, where a member of the PCG team recalls a game from the olden days (a few years ago), and tells us why it's still a great game.

Well, most of you with a subscription to/who have bought PC GAMER may well have seen article this allready, but I figured I'd post this up anyway, for those who dont get the magazine. Though it isnt exactly "breaking news", I doubt the TD news section will be getting much in the way of news anyway, so here it is.
The two attached Images are scans of the Article. They are VERY large, as my scanner has two settings: So small the text is impossible to read, and Huge. Sorry 56K'ers, is you want to see youre in for a long wait...

TD is also this month's "Classic demo", and the demo is on the DVD that comes with the magazine.

Note the comments about TS and RA, and Generals. They have different views to most of us...

Discuss the article in this thread...

This post has been edited by Creagor: Nov 25 2006, 03:58 PM

Attached image(s)

 

[Blaat85]

Yeah indeed.. Generals had actually absolutely very little in common with C&C (TD). I liked Generals less than the others (RA1, TD, RA2 and TD). Generals has a nice engine, very well moddable, but the campaigns I did not like a lot and the gameplay is less too, in my opinion.

But it's nice to see old C&C featured in a games magazine .

[Genobee]

Nice thing they still make reviews of old , googd games.

[Team Black]

Old school is where it's at; you can have all the gaphics you want, but without good gameplay it's CRAP.
Dawn, Mario 3, tetris, Sonic 3 & Knuckles, marble madness, Excitebike, man, I could go on...

[SeekSomethingNew]

oh its been a loooooong time since i see TD in a mag... bloody hell! im getting old

[Denmon]

Well you sure aint young old man!

[MasterNinja]

Nice article, but the pictures are a little strange, especially the one with "Concrete walls were vital for defence" underneath it.

WTF? Seems as if they had someone who never played C&C to make the subtitles for the pictures just by looking at it and making up something (also note the "rocket chopper deathfest").

Walls are a waste of ressources and your nerves. They are nearly never useful and merely an element of map design than of playing the game. Concrete walls only are sometimes useful in combination with GDI Missile Towers and NOD Obelisks, but even then you normally build 1 or 2 or max 3 of them and it even does not help very much. That's far from "vital", don't you think? Sandbags and fences seem to be made of paper anyway (even while the AI cannot aim for the walls they often enough tear them down just by splash damage), so they are completely useless... for defence at least (I don't count blocking paths for the AI or even trapping it in it's base, since this is a lame trick/cheat).

[EDIT: I just noticed the player in the screenshot with that "rocket chopper deathfest" is actually USING the "sandbag trick" Sure, it's final mission, but come on, it's possible to beat without such stuff - and without getting bored to death in the meantime.]

This post has been edited by MasterNinja: May 7 2008, 12:48 AM

[ShDwBoRn]

wow, thats a pretty massive bump, that could have caused a distortion in the space time continuum penultimately ending life as we know it.

WALLS ARE FUN. and they save you from engineers

[Banshee]

It is an acceptable bump, because he is actually adding something to the topic, by discussing parts of the article.


Anyway, I disagree with the article writer who completely ignored RA2 and placed Generals in the same level than the first C&C. There is no way to compare a game that is a (great) campaign only (with some multiplayer and no skirmish) and another that has absoletely no campaign (I really dispise Generals's campaign, honestly). And RA2 was a classic, which is why there is so much hype on RA3.

And also, walls are useful to prevent or slow down engineers from capturing your buildings.

[MasterNinja]

Red Alert 2? Where you have colorful candies instead of units? And all that stuff "borrowed" from Starcraft in it?


I don't really know C&C Generals, I've seen it, sure, but never played it. It definitely hasn't anything to do with Command&Conquer just because they put that name on the box for no apparent reason (ok, there is a reason: MONEY!!! If it has Command&Conquer on it, it can be more expensive and will be bought more often). But from what I heared it sure is a great RTS game anyway.


I absolutely do have the same opinion as the author of the article regarding Tiberian Sun... I was looking forward to this game for such a long time and when it came out and I bought it, it was a huge disappointment. It's exactly the feeling the author describes, t's quite okay, but somehow something is missing... And, don't forget: BUGS! Lots of them. Massive ones. Small ones... AI Bugs. Crashes. There were lots of patches, but it did not really get better with this. And not to mention the CHEATING AI! Ok, the computer cheats in all C&C games, it's for reason, because the AI can't be as good as a human opponent, so they have to "compensate"... But Tiberian Sun takes it to a new level, the computer is so blatantly obviously cheating, in spite of several years that have been there to improve AI, so it should use less cheating than in Tiberian Dawn, not more.

This post has been edited by MasterNinja: May 14 2008, 10:29 PM

[Rico]

Funny thing is I never used any of the 'cheats' of blocking AI with sandbags etc and have won the campaign numerous times
Ah CnC, the game that made me the person I am today

[ORCACommander]

Tiberian Sun and its expansion pack is the only game in the Saga where walls were useful because you had gates. RA2 no gates wtf should you have a wall. and Walls are good at slowing down your opponent except in YR where they can just send a n00b fort over it.

[Winged One]

I have no idea why you guys do not realize that walls are one of the most important structures. They build base perimeters and keep out enemy units. Gates? Pfft. In C&C, I built a square around my base, sold three continuous sections, and placed two guard towers, one on either side. The result is a one square entrance, protected by two guard towers, and, if you wish, two advanced guard towers. It makes it virtually impossible to infiltrate your base.

I don't understand how bases can be constructed without them. There'd be huge gaping holes in your defenses.