:: Home :: Get Hosted :: PPM FAQ :: Forum FAQ :: Privacy Policy :: Search :: Memberlist :: Usergroups :: Register :: Profile :: Log in to check your private messages :: Log in ::
Do you want to advertise at Project Perfect Mod. Find out how to do it HERE.

The time now is Mon Jun 18, 2018 7:22 pm
All times are UTC + 0
 Forum index » PPM Zone » PPM Discussion Zone » Site Sections
Gamescom 2013: The next Command & Conquer game
Moderators: Global Moderators
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 4 [180 Posts] View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Author Message
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 5:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orac wrote:
I don't even undestand what Orange is arguing.  Without a better understanding of his core standpoint, there's not much I can say.

I enjoyed Renegade, but C&C it was not.  (It forgot about the 'Command' part, for one thing)


Ren thinks Generals is not a true C&C. I tell him that besides the story it is a true WW C&C and that it is a true EA C&C as well. The points he brought up as to why he thinks so in his first post is what disturbs me. Stuff like the interface or game mechanics, dozers and bottombar and stuff. Or in other words he thinks if WW would never have gotten messed with by EA they would still be making Tiberian Dawn for years to come.

Besides all that, if westwood is ow so loving Tiberium Dawn then why did Universe at war have gone somewhat the same way as Generals?

Orac you seem not to understand it too. C&C stood for the story, Kane Nod GDI. Until EA took over where it stood for the 3 franchises you named. A brilliant move, RA is the wonky one, TS the sci-fi and Generals the real life modern times one. Like that you go 3 franchises and thus can bring out a new C&C every year without changing much except the paint job.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blubb
General


Joined: 31 Jul 2005

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 6:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote


_________________

Hydraw Art on Facebook

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Atomic_Noodles
Defense Minister


Joined: 05 Oct 2011

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 7:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eventually you'll have to realize alot of people now have Widescreen Monitors so a GUI at the bottom/top would generally provide more space than a sidebar.

Petroglyph isn't an exact resurrection of WW.
_________________
~ Excelsior ~

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Martin Killer
Missile Trooper


Joined: 27 Nov 2005

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 8:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

blubb wrote:

Trolling the fanatics.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Skype Account
Zengar_Zombolt
Plasma Trooper


Joined: 30 Apr 2008

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Who is that?
_________________
I am Zengar Zombolt, The Sword That Cleaves Evil!

There is Nothing I can not Cut!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Atomic_Noodles
Defense Minister


Joined: 05 Oct 2011

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Judging from image name.. Dustin Browder?
_________________
~ Excelsior ~

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Banshee
Supreme Banshee


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Location: Brazil

PostPosted: Thu Sep 19, 2013 11:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

He was a producer of Red Alert 2 and he is the executive producer of Starcraft 2.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Skype Account
Zengar_Zombolt
Plasma Trooper


Joined: 30 Apr 2008

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I only recently had and lost RA2, and do not have that firm of attachment to any of the "old Team"
_________________
I am Zengar Zombolt, The Sword That Cleaves Evil!

There is Nothing I can not Cut!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Atomic_Noodles
Defense Minister


Joined: 05 Oct 2011

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 6:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Heh...

the only Devs/Staff I know from RA2/YR is

Joe Kucan
Frank Klepacki
TJ Frames
Phil Roberts
Barry Corbin
Udo Kier
Kari Wuhrer
Athena Massey
Aleksandra Kaniak
_________________
~ Excelsior ~

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Martin Killer
Missile Trooper


Joined: 27 Nov 2005

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Atomic_Noodles wrote:
Heh...

the only Devs/Staff I know from RA2/YR is

Joe Kucan
Frank Klepacki
TJ Frames
Phil Roberts
Barry Corbin
Udo Kier
Kari Wuhrer
Athena Massey
Aleksandra Kaniak


Most of them didn't take any part in gameplay development. To be honest, all of them

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Skype Account
blubb
General


Joined: 31 Jul 2005

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote




_________________

Hydraw Art on Facebook

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Renegade
Cyborg Artillery


Joined: 21 May 2006
Location: Hamburg, Germany

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@OrangeNero: You made nine posts since my previous post. You still fail to name a single parallel between Generals and previous C&C games, other than the fact that it's an RTS, and EA chose to abuse the brand for it.

Sole Survivor and C&C: Renegade both took place within the established C&C universe: Sole Survivor had familiar graphics, a familiar interface, and very similar gameplay elements. While C&C: Renegade's visuals and gameplay are vastly different from previous C&Cs, despite its complete difference in concept, it takes place deep inside the established universe, extends the (his)story of the war, and still manages to bring back the majority of units familiar from previous C&C games.

Compared to C&C: Renegade, Generals was dramatically closer to the "typical" C&Cs: RTS, mouse-click based interface, etc., etc.
How much of previous C&Cs did Generals bring back?
Same universe? Nope.
Familiar units? Nope.
Similar gameplay? Nope - Generals is closer to AoE than to TD/TS.

So yeah. A game of an entirely different genre managed to tap into established C&C lore.
The ztyping next C&C RTS did not.

Once again, on the off chance it finally goes through your thick skull: The only thing Generals had in common with previous C&C games was the branding and the genre.

Had you taken the "C&C" off of Renegade, people would still have recognized the universe.
Had you taken the "C+C" off of Generals, nobody would have made the connection.
_________________
#RenProj on chat.freenode.net

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
blubb
General


Joined: 31 Jul 2005

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 7:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

generals has a better, more refined, yeah..BETTER mechanic than any...ANY of the previous titles, and that's not a hard thing to do, because the story was the ONLY thing the old CNC titles did well, everything else didn't age very well, and everyone would certainly agree, that TD and RA and TS "mechanics" and "gameplay" and "balance" are total shit if compared with generals, wich wasn't broken beyond repair.
so yeah, the old titles got a nice story, but what of it if the gameplay is shit, unless you "play with yourself".
_________________

Hydraw Art on Facebook

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orac
President


Joined: 11 Jul 2008
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

brb, spamming Battlemasters.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Renegade wrote:

Familiar units? Nope.


I am just gonna concentrate on this part of your post since the reply for everything else lies within those 9 posts of mine and I will not repeat myself just because you can't read.

Not familiar units?

riflemen and rocketguy being the base infantry for all factions. check (OMG chinese can lay tnt and USA got that laser ability)
universal scout that fits all roles besides killing tanks. check (OMG the USA hummer is pretty much teh allied ifv)
Orca=Apache. check (OMG it got machineguns and self reloading missiles and that rocket firing ability)
double barreled tank. check (OMG its not just a mammoth tank but actually a fresh idea with the 3 upgrades, but they should of have done the Mammoth tank for the 10th time or so because ztype progress)
flametank. check (OMG it got ability to fire in an arc now)
Mig (OMG Mig)
GLA underground tunnel network (Nod underground units)
Commando unit(commando unit)
The amount of units and the design behind them feeling just like any rts C&C before.

If I had played Generals without knowing its C&C my first impression would be:

Oh hey it feels like C&C justt now in 3D with some nice new stuff.

The wacky unit quotes. check.

Renegade get it into your thick skull. The old story driven C&C is dead. Finito. There is the NEW C&C which has now 3 franchises and Generals is in no way a betrayal to the new C&C philosophy and gameplay wise stays true to the old titles.

Whats next because Generals has got a shellmap its betraying C&C?

And btw the game that broke with the old story is RA2 not Generals.

I also have a little theory. I think some people at WW were in the Gulf War, the first one or were at least inspired by it because honestly Tiberium Dawn got a lot of Gulf War feeling. Now guess what in Generals you got Gulf War scenario as well but this time the mlrs is not your anti air unit and I'd say its a good thing. Come to think of it are you a ztyping retard all the GDI units are pretty much equal to the ones of the USA. What did the RA expansion do? Oh right, it brought us NEW UNITS with NEW FEATURES and NEW GAMEPLAY.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orac
President


Joined: 11 Jul 2008
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Apache
Orca Fighter

...Identical.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Martin Killer
Missile Trooper


Joined: 27 Nov 2005

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orac wrote:
brb, spamming Battlemasters.

brb, Missile Defenders.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Skype Account
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As for some gameplay mechanics.

In TD you can call in airstrikes which are "out of map" units attacking a position or target you choose.

In Generals you can call in airstrikes which...

---

In TD you had area denial because of terrain attributes. Tiberium was harmful to infantry so the fields restricted where you can go.

In TS this was brought further by blue tiberium being more harmful. Veins killing vehicles. Gas killing everything. harvesters blow up violently becoming suicidal units.

In RA2 radiation.

In Generals you got radiation and chemicals. Exact same philosophy behind. Area denial through "auras" or whatever you wanna call it. Suicide trucks being the same as the harvester and hunter Seeker and Demo truck. just with a bit more and a bit new stuff to it. You could now choose the load out. OMG betrayal? I don't think so.

---

In C&C you got fields where you can harvest ressources and in RA2 oil derricks.

In Generals yo got fields of supply and oil derricks.

---

Power.

Power.

---

Honestly your question is so stupid. It begs to ask the question if the Tick tank is betrayal to TD seeing how units never deployed in this old title. Deploying was one new feature. In Generals some units also deploy and has brought us just like all the titles have done before new features.

Oh and veterancy works the same too.
no similarities.
rofl.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orac wrote:
Apache
Orca Fighter

...Identical.


Yes identical. Flying unit that fires missiles at enemy armor and can stand still in the air. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LN_Z_VKLraQ/TVmM7XYe0zI/AAAAAAAAAvk/u0kP4IbH48g/s1600/marhukCobra.jpg

In the future helis don't have rotors anymore. So what? If the idiots at WW would have gotten rotors to work it might even would have some.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.google.ch/search?client=opera&q=Orca+renegade&oe=utf-8&channel=suggest&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi&ei=H-A8Ut-AEonM0QXo-oHwDA#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=5kZAsLMQXM9IKM%3A%3BG7A_0lLSvdzKbM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.cncnz.com%252Fimages%252Fgames%252Ftd%252Fcnc10_gallery%252Frenders%252Forca1.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.cncnz.com%252Fgames%252Fcommand-conquer%252Fgallery%252Frenders%252F%3B450%3B300

Got rotors. Got the machinegun from the apache.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is this the same tail and the rotor at the back the one the orca got in a different angle next to the cockpit?

http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/2118/rah66comanche1caps2621.jpg

btw sorry meant Comanche.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zengar_Zombolt
Plasma Trooper


Joined: 30 Apr 2008

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you play RA1 Allies campaign, is there any story connections to TD? If it was not for kane would there be fore the Soviets? Outside massive amounts of recycled assets, would they be similar?

Not to help Orange in his fervent statement, but I just had that thought when someone brought up how unconnected Generals is to the other two CnC lines.
_________________
I am Zengar Zombolt, The Sword That Cleaves Evil!

There is Nothing I can not Cut!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Orac
President


Joined: 11 Jul 2008
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 6:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think that what you're arguing makes sense.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Renegade
Cyborg Artillery


Joined: 21 May 2006
Location: Hamburg, Germany

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blubb wrote:
generals has a better, more refined, yeah..BETTER mechanic than any...ANY of the previous titles, and that's not a hard thing to do, because the story was the ONLY thing the old CNC titles did well, everything else didn't age very well, and everyone would certainly agree, that TD and RA and TS "mechanics" and "gameplay" and "balance" are total shit if compared with generals, wich wasn't broken beyond repair.
so yeah, the old titles got a nice story, but what of it if the gameplay is shit, unless you "play with yourself".

So you are arguing that any RTS from 2003+ is automatically a C&C, because it's an improvement over 1995's Command & Conquer?
Are you saying Starcraft is a C&C, because it's famous for its balancing?
Are you calling Homeworld a C&C, because it literally brings a whole other dimension into play?

The question is not whether Generals is a passable RTS.
The question is whether Generals is a Command & Conquer RTS.

And for that, technical improvements are irrelevant. Of course it would be nice if newer games were technically improved, but the game universe and the brand aren't based on technical improvements.

(That would be Quake.)

OrangeNero wrote:
I am just gonna concentrate on this part of your post since the reply for everything else lies within those 9 posts of mine and I will not repeat myself just because you can't read.

Maybe if you actually read the excrement you produce, you would understand that your 9 posts amount to nothing more than a baby's annoyed scream after it just peed itself.

But fine, just to take the wind out of your sails, I'll deal with one of them as an example: Rolling Eyes

OrangeNero wrote:
Earth 2150 didn't even have infantry.
Warzone is a build your tank game without infantry either.

...and yet, both of them are better than Generals, despite being older.
Because Generals is that generic.

OrangeNero wrote:
Generals took the Infantry garrison of buildings further, allowing all infantry to be placed inside them

So your point is, because there was one unit in one game of the series that could garrison particular buildings, and because EA lazily chose to make a "feature" out of it for the expansion to use the existing code to come up with one building for the other side, infantry garrisoning is a stable of the Command & Conquer series and the fact that Generals has it makes it a clear successor to C&C?

But! Thank you for making that point. I appreciate it. It is more evidence that Generals is closer related to Age of Empires than to C&C.
Then again, Earth 2140 also used garrisoning for strategic purposes, years before YR. *shrug*


OrangeNero wrote:
It took the IFV logic further with the humvee and the chinook.

Actually, it's more similar to the Battle Fortress. You know...loading shit inside it and letting said shit fire its own weaponry.
Now, one could argue that that's a parallel to an actual C&C game...if it weren't for the fact that that's been a feature of real-life APCs since forever - the BTR-60 entered service 1959 and had "three firing ports on each upper side of the hull through which the infantry being transported can fire at the enemy with their personal weapons" (Wikipedia).
Sorry, but if "using real-world technology in a game" equals "being a Command & Conquer game", then ztyping DigDug is a Command & Conquer game - I have seen shovels irl.
By that logic, all RTSs with rifles are C&C games, because all C&C games have riflemen
No points for copying the behavior of actual-world technology the units are based on.

Though, even if I were to give points for that, Earth 2140's WTRN and WTP 100 allowed transported vehicles to fire their weapons while being transported. Earth 2140 was released 1997, so not only is YR's Battle Fortress based on real-world technology, but if "similar but better" equals "universe-connecting game parallel", then Yuri's Revenge belongs into the Earth series of RTS, because clearly the Battle Fortress took the WTP 100 logic further.
Rolling Eyes

Unless you mean the fact that you can upgrade the Humvee's weaponry, in which case you might want to take a look at those games you dismissed for not having infantry earlier - clearly they went even further even earlier, so they must be C&Cs, right?

Then again, given your obvious brain damage, you might as well mean the fact that you can use it for scouting.
Because, clearly, no other RTSs have scouting units. Rolling Eyes Totally a staple of the C&C universe. Rolling Eyes

OrangeNero wrote:
The dozer is just like the conyard but instead of buildings getting constructed and repaired magically out of nowhere you now have to build a builder in your conyard.

C&C: No builder-units
Age of Empires: Villagers
WarCraft: Peasant/Peon
StarCraft: Probe/SCV/Drone
Earth 2140: MCU
Dark Reign: Construction Rig
Warzone 2100: Trucks

Congratulations. You just chose the least C&C-like element of Generals to show parallels to C&C.
Do you realize how utterly retarded you are, or are you in some state of blissful ignorance?

Oh, by the way: Score another point on the list of reasons why Generals is closer to AoE than C&C.

OrangeNero wrote:
the aircrafts are finally worthwhile instead of completely rubbish.

And this is a parallel to C&C how?
That makes Generals more like Empire Earth. Totally proof that Generals is a C&C. Rolling Eyes

OrangeNero wrote:
Radiation and nuclear waste take RA2 demo truck and venom further.

The implementation of the known, natural effects of game technology inspired by real-world technology somehow provides a meaningful, universe-joining connection?
That's the same as saying Dune II is a Tiberian game, because it also plays in a desert world.

There aren't too many ways you can depict reality.

OrangeNero wrote:
Its gameplay is like the old C&C games just with a step forward but you apparently see every step forward from Tiberian Dawn as a betrayal which is completely against WW vision but fits a butthurt oldtimer.

No, its gameplay is like any other generic RTS, but you're too young, too stupid and too ignorant to grasp that.

Your entire list contains of two kinds of parallels: Parallels that exist because they're generic RTS staples, and parallels that exist because the games implement something from the real world.
No parallel you listed relies on anything that is inherent, typical or unique to Command & Conquer.

Happy, now that we've seen once more that all you're doing is drooling irrelevant shit onto this board?
Alright, then let's carry on with your current post, shall we?

OrangeNero wrote:
Not familiar units?

Yepp.

OrangeNero wrote:
riflemen and rocketguy being the base infantry for all factions. check (OMG chinese can lay tnt and USA got that laser ability)

Yes, clearly the fact that infantry has been a staple of real world warfare for several thousand years only in recent decades began to be displaced as its very, and the fact that 90% of all RTSs use infantry as their base unity have nothing to do with the fact that C&C and Generals have basic infantry units.
And damn, since they're both playing in modern times, they both have guns and rocket launcher units! :O
It must be because they're part of the same universe!

Say, how did you enjoy Command & Conquer: Earth 2140?
I mean, UCS and ED both have riflemen and rocketguys as their base infantry (Silver ONE, Silver R / A01, A02), so clearly, Earth 2140 was a C&C game, right? Rolling Eyes

In fact, since you specified "all factions", the makeup of factions is clearly an important part of your argument.
The Tiberian universe had two playable factions before EA got involved.
The Red Alert universe had two playable factions before EA got involved.
Earth 2140 had two playable factions.
Generals has three playable factions.

So by your own focus, Earth 2140 is actually closer to classic C&C than Generals is. (Two factions with riflemen+rocketguys vs. three factions with riflemen+rocketguys.)
Way to prove your point, dummy.

OrangeNero wrote:
universal scout that fits all roles besides killing tanks. check (OMG the USA hummer is pretty much teh allied ifv)

Straw man. This parallel only seems to work because you are falsely constricting the units based on pretense and preference:

  • The unproven assumption that either vehicle was designed as a "universal scout".
  • The bullshit claim that both vehicles fit all roles...
  • ...besides killing tanks.

Especially the latter one is only thrown in because you know full well that every ztyping RTS has a scout unit.
The hilarity of it is that your latter two conditions actually cancel each other out: The IFV gains its variability through its passengers. In order to fulfil the "fits all roles" condition, you must allow passengers - but if you allow passengers, you inevitably also allow Chrono IFVs, self-destructing IFVs, etc. Which aren't too shabby against tanks.

As for your unproven assumption: Personally, as an Ally, I always scouted with Rocketeers. I never considered the IFV a "scout unit". It's a frickin' specializable Infantry Fighting Vehicle and way too valuable in that capacity early in the game to waste it like that.
Also, Rocketeers cost the same but aren't blocked by cliffs and rivers and can only be attacked by AA weaponry, instead of everyone down to civilian units.

What moron scouts with IFVs instead? o_O

OrangeNero wrote:
Orca=Apache. check (OMG it got machineguns and self reloading missiles and that rocket firing ability)

No, you see...Apache=Apache. Because, you know...it's an actual thing.
So if you're arguing that the Orca looks like an Apache, then your point is moot - because the parallel develops because both units are based on the same real world technology, and share that similarity with every video game in history that includes Apaches.
So even if you were right in that they were similar, this would be a parallel parallel to reality, not a parallel between the games because they're part of the same franchise.
But given the picture posted in response to this, I wouldn't even agree you are right.


OrangeNero wrote:
double barreled tank. check (OMG its not just a mammoth tank but actually a fresh idea with the 3 upgrades, but they should of have done the Mammoth tank for the 10th time or so because ztype progress)

Dune II's Siege Tank: Check
Dune II's Harkonnen Devastator Tank: Check
StarCraft's Siege Tank: Check
Reality's AC1 Sentinel: Check
Reality's Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte concept: Check
Reality's Churchill A20 Model: Check
Reality's 2S35 "Koalitsiya-SV": Check
Reality's Type 60 SPRR: Check

While the Mammoth is of course iconic, and I will give you that they very most likely included a double-barreled tank to pander to the fans of the actual C&C games, the fact remains that double-barreled tanks have been a concept pretty much since tanks were invented ("One cannon works well? Let's put TWO on it, then!"), and that Westwood had done it before on at least two Dune II tanks.
So if anything, it's a Westwood signature that EA appropriated.

I'm not going to call StarCraft a C&C because it has a double-barreled tank, so it cannot be enough to make Generals a C&C, either.

Besides, I'm pretty sure both Warzone 2100 and Earth 2150 offer dual barrels as well, but I'm not going to comb through the entire research tree.

OrangeNero wrote:
flametank. check (OMG it got ability to fire in an arc now)

I am getting tired of point out the fact that reality exists, so here's the link to the Wikipedia article about flame tanks: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flame_tank
As usual, other game developers also live in reality and also researched tanks for their tank-based games, so yes, other RTS also have flame tanks.

OrangeNero wrote:
Mig (OMG Mig)

I am getting tired of point out the fact that reality exists, so here's the link to the Wikipedia list of MiG aircraft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiG#List_of_MiG_aircraft
As usual, other game developers also live in reality and also researched aircraft for their aircraft-containing games, so yes, other RTS also have MiGs.

OrangeNero wrote:
GLA underground tunnel network (Nod underground units)

I will skip the part where I point out that tunnels aren't exactly a new concept in the world, either, and go straight to the part where Earth 2150 included tunneling on a level that Generals could only dream of. So if the mere fact that an RTS has more tunneling than TS turns it into a C&C, Earth 2150 was the 3D C&C three years before Generals.

In fact, Earth 2150 was released half a year before Red Alert 2.

For those of you who haven't played Earth 2150, here's a description from a preview off the web:
Quote:
My absolute favorite feature is the inclusion of tunnels. Now when I saw this option in the build menu, I figured that it would allow you to build a hole through a hill. That would have been nice, but probably not used all that much unless the game has huge cliffs that were impassable. After figuring out exactly what tunnels were though I was amazed. Tunnels in Earth 2150 are really a second playing field under the ground. Tunnel entrances can be built anywhere on a map (besides on the water), once you tell a unit to enter a tunnel it will be transported underground where you will already find rooms and paths that can be traveled. Your constructor can create tunnels under the ground that will connect the rooms so that you can get around under there. Having this second playing field allows you to travel underground and water undetected. I'm sure you can think of some possibilities this will give. You have to be careful though because enemies can also use the tunnel entrances that you create and they could also setup a trap picking off your units one by one as they transport out. The best part of the tunnels is that your units do realize that they're there. If you build an underground path to avoid taking a long route around a lake or impassable hill, all you have to do is point your units to where you want them on the map. If using a tunnel is quickest, they'll take the entrance, travel underground to a tunnel exit, pop up and move to where you wanted them.

That was awesome tunneling. Generals's system is a joke compared to it. Did I mention that game was in 3D and released years before Generals? So no, there's no excuse for delivering something crappier. (Other than being EA and not giving a shit about anything but money.)

OrangeNero wrote:
Commando unit(commando unit)
The amount of units and the design behind them feeling just like any rts C&C before.

Certainly. Because it's an RTS staple, many RTSs include hero units, and the majority of them shape them roughly the same way.
Unless you mean that in terms of actual commandos, in which case you can imagine the paragraph about reality here again.

OrangeNero wrote:
If I had played Generals without knowing its C&C my first impression would be:

Oh hey it feels like C&C justt now in 3D with some nice new stuff.

Then you've probably never played Age of Empires, Earth 2150 or Warzone 2100.
Or any of the other many RTSs with their interfaces at the bottom, builder-based construction, etc., etc.

Or you're just retarded. Which, admittedly, is more likely.

OrangeNero wrote:
The wacky unit quotes. check.

Subjective.
Personally, I associate Blizzard's *Craft RTSs with wacky unit quotes, particularly WarCraft III.

While, yes, C&C has funny unit audio, once again, it's a broader RTS phenomenon, and not something that lends itself to saying "if it has funny unit audio, it must be a C&C!".

OrangeNero wrote:
Renegade get it into your thick skull. The old story driven C&C is dead. Finito. There is the NEW C&C which has now 3 franchises and Generals is in no way a betrayal to the new C&C philosophy and gameplay wise stays true to the old titles.

The funniest part about arguing with stupid people is how they constantly defeat themselves.
If you agree that the old C&C is dead, and the 3-branch "C&C" is a new C&C, then wtf are you arguing about?
If old C&C is dead, and Generals belongs to new C&C, then by your very own statement, I am correct: Generals is not a true C&C, EA just slapped the brand onto it.
You may argue about the semantics of "true" by saying that EA owns the brand and EA decides what's C&C and what is not, but the fact remains: According to your statement, we are in agreement that Generals does not belong into the same line of games as the classic C&C games.
It's part of a new, EA-based line of C&C games.

Since you agree that Generals does not belong into that original C&C group, and you agree that it's distinct from the previous two, established C&C franchises (by explitly pointing out there are three now), you are, essentially, agreeing that Generals is the start of a completely independent line of games that EA decided to slap the brand onto.

All you could possibly argue about would be that Generals is connected to C&C the same way that RA established a connection to TD, thus embedding itself in the universe.

Go right ahead. Do explain to me how Generals connects to TD or RA, story/universe-wise.

OrangeNero wrote:
Whats next because Generals has got a shellmap its betraying C&C?

I love how you keep making up supposed points out of thin air. There's a term for that, but you're not worth looking it up.

OrangeNero wrote:
And btw the game that broke with the old story is RA2 not Generals.

And btw, the only one who keeps going on about story progression is you. I asked about parallels.

OrangeNero wrote:
I also have a little theory. I think some people at WW were in the Gulf War, the first one or were at least inspired by it because honestly Tiberium Dawn got a lot of Gulf War feeling. Now guess what in Generals you got Gulf War scenario as well but this time the mlrs is not your anti air unit and I'd say its a good thing. Come to think of it are you a ztyping retard all the GDI units are pretty much equal to the ones of the USA. What did the RA expansion do? Oh right, it brought us NEW UNITS with NEW FEATURES and NEW GAMEPLAY.

I've got a theory: It could be bunnies.

In all seriousness, look at Dune II and you will realize where the inspiration for Tiberian Dawn game from: "We can do this better and make more money off of it by making up our own universe instead of paying for a license."

No proofreading on this post since I've wasted enough of my time on your sorry ass.
You've also wasted enough of it to not get another answer for a few days. You'll have to wait if you really want another beating.
_________________
#RenProj on chat.freenode.net

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Graion Dilach
Defense Minister


Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Location: Iszkaszentgyörgy, Hungary

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I need a like button. Or a billboard.
_________________



AS Discord server: https://discord.gg/7aM7Hm2

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website ModDB Profile ID
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 3:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LOL Renegade forget it your walls of text tactic to flood the other wont work. Neither will your twisting words and reality.

You say Generals has no familiar units? So apparently the USA has nothing in common with the GDI huh. LOL

You talk about 2 originally established franchises Tiberium and RA. That is completely wrong you idiot. There once was only Tiberium and then they expanded it to 3. RA2 is NOT part of the original story which is hilarious because most of what we argue could be applied to that game as well but hey you just don't want to admit it, fine.

Your entire wall of text comes down to this: All the progression in the core features is betrayal. This retardness of you goes so far that you can't even see familiarity between the commando units and not even between the Comanche and Orca. I bet the Medium Tank that all factions got apparently doesn't have any familiarity with the Medium Tank from all other C&C. Or wait here's a better false argument from you: Other games got Medium Tank too so its just a generic shit. LOL C&C is by far the most generic RTS.

But here's whats most hilarious. Any one who liked Generals and thinks it has anything in common with C&C is apparently for you a (insult various insults and retardness here)

You are so low and that tit sucking little dipshit below you fits the meme so well. Only a butthurt little shit like you could write up such a huge serious text with 0 value at all besides showing what an idiot you are.
You don't even get stuff like WW fitting every unit to the faction. Generals does that too, they changed core units to fit the factions they are in. Nonetheless they still are the original units.

Apparently you never want a game that changes or progresses in ANY WAY from TD and will see everything as betrayal. A hilarious view considering the original creator in the interview is all about progression.

Funny is that you come up with Homefront. Ya know considering that we had spacestations, orbital cannons, aliens and spaceships in TS I long ago thought it would be pretty cool to have C&C in space. Ya know because it would of have been like... the next step. But you wont get that either.

Renegade I only agree at one point which I already said. Generals is part of a new C&C. Not the original story. I never said otherwise. What I do say however is that in all other aspects it is true to the old C&C. You apparently can't stand dozers, you rather want to see buildings getting constructed out of nowhere because BS. You apparently hate bottom bar because of every other C&C having side bar before. The old original C&C is defined by 2 things. Games must have action. Games must be about GDI Nod. They changed that. Now C&C stands for something new, the 3 franchises. Therefore you writting that Generals has nothing in common with C&C is completely wrong, specify that you mean the old WW story. But you are not only about the story but also about every step of progression and that is what I argue with you about.

You are one spoiled little piece of shit. Be glad that Generals was such a good game it could of have been much worse considering all the ztype ups with this franchise.

Quote:
If you agree that the old C&C is dead, and the 3-branch "C&C" is a new C&C, then wtf are you arguing about?

I argue about that WW would have done the same progression and new features. And that the gameplay feels like the original with progression. I repeatedly said it takes core features a step further. This is a doing WW has always been doing. They never stood still. They progressed with each game. Next step on WW to do list wold probably have been the Scrin. Then you would have gotten your homeworld C&C, I would of have found it so cool, maybe a little too just to mock you. And please stop seeing DOS limitations as core features. Dozers wouldn't even have worked probably neither would a bottom bar be practical with those old monitors.

In TS there are deployable units. In TD there were none. How come you don't bitch about that? Oh right because WW has done it. In RA2 we got an IFV, in no C&C before did we get that. How come you don't bitch about that? In RA we got various changes from TD. How come you don't bitch about that? Apparently for you Renegade every step of progression done by WW is holy but if someone else has done logical progression it isn't because ztype EA.

Sad thing is apart from writing about your own ignorance, word twisting and idioticy you brought nothing new interesting up worth to be replied to. I consider this your defeat. No one will get you to admit it, not that it would be necessary. That every one who liked Generals is a (insult various insults here) for you is most amusing.
I shall end this with the words of Dilach, your favorite bitch at night.

Go play your WarCrap.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dutchygamer
President


Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Normally I dislike the long and detailed posts Renegade makes, and the sillyness OrangeNero posts, but I want to see who will win this one.
*grabs popcorn*
_________________
Please, read the signature rules of the forum.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Skype Account
Graion Dilach
Defense Minister


Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Location: Iszkaszentgyörgy, Hungary

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You know what?

Make the world a better place, go die in a fire, you conceived wretched idiot... I feel pity of your parents who probably wanted a child, not a Butthead.

Recently I can't stand Ren, and that's known. But this time I'm on his side.

You know kiddo... one thing is logical stuff and another is rolling the whole table over.
_________________



AS Discord server: https://discord.gg/7aM7Hm2

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website ModDB Profile ID
blubb
General


Joined: 31 Jul 2005

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

that escalated quickly
_________________

Hydraw Art on Facebook

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
^Rampastein
Rampastring


Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: Gensokyo

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Graion Dilach wrote:
You know kiddo... one thing is logical stuff and another is rolling the whole table over.

Agreed. I was thinking of replying to OrangeNero at one point but then I realized that I was wasting my time trying to make him actually understand something. I have to respect Renegade for trying though.
_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message ModDB Profile ID Facebook Profile URL
blubb
General


Joined: 31 Jul 2005

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

but at one point ren questions reality simply by saying generals is not a true cnc, but since EA bought cnc and put the name on it , it is literally a CNC, it's certainly different tough, but it'sa true CNC since no one has the rights to reproduce a different successor.
_________________

Hydraw Art on Facebook

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dutchygamer
President


Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands

PostPosted: Sat Sep 21, 2013 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If anyone want to give a try at convincing Banshee to ban him, go ahead. I've tried 2 times already.
_________________
Please, read the signature rules of the forum.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Skype Account
Banshee
Supreme Banshee


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Location: Brazil

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 4:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You guys have ruined my topic Laughing

Anyway, let's get straight to a couple of points here:

@OrangeNero and GraionDilach: Tone down your vocabulary, regardless of what other people says, or I'll start to suspend you two. Consider it a last warning before action is taken.

@Renegade and blubb: Command & Conquer franchise belongs to EA, so they decide what will receive the Command & Conquer stamp and, dispite the generic RTS looking and lack relationship of Generals with other C&C games in terms of storyline, gameplay, user interface, etc... they decided that it would sell if it is considered a Command & Conquer game. Of course, we don't need to agree with their decisions. Generals 2 is just as Command & Conquer as Generals.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Skype Account
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 7:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

you are free to split.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 9:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This convo made me play some Generals after a long while. I greatly enjoyed it. Especially that I could upgrade my powerplants so comfortable which is a real pain in my TS mod and TS in general. I also really much enjoyed the tech center, this awesome mechanic of changing tactics with the USA one, or the bunker that GLA got. I couldn't finish playing without noticing that the core tech tree is identical with the very first C&C.

Power
Barracks
Refinery
Warfactory
Techcenter

Never did I miss searching in a sidebar for my harvester to build. Just clicked on the building and it got created. Never did I had to fiddle around with setting priority to a factory. Pretty much every gameplay sapect that I liked is there, most that I dislike are gone.

Now listen closely because its intended to make you puke: Generals didn't only take it a small step further no, it brought it a giant step closer to perfection.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zengar_Zombolt
Plasma Trooper


Joined: 30 Apr 2008

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Can I at least have my question below answered.

Does this mean the "New Version Flame" target is now CnCg2f2p22222222 and I can openly like CnC4 without being burned at the stake? Can I have a reasonable conversation without it turning into a Official CnC forum flame war of attrition wtich I lose for only having one voice? Can I not have to rely on people who go on wild tangents (i.e. nero)  for back up?

Can I also openly like RA3 and anything released on a console for the above because G2f2p22222222 is now the CnC fan irrational hate sponge?
_________________
I am Zengar Zombolt, The Sword That Cleaves Evil!

There is Nothing I can not Cut!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dutchygamer
President


Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zengar_Zombolt wrote:
Can I at least have my question below answered.

Does this mean the "New Version Flame" target is now CnCg2f2p22222222 and I can openly like CnC4 without being burned at the stake? Can I have a reasonable conversation without it turning into a Official CnC forum flame war of attrition wtich I lose for only having one voice? Can I not have to rely on people who go on wild tangents (i.e. nero)  for back up?

Can I also openly like RA3 and anything released on a console for the above because G2f2p22222222 is now the CnC fan irrational hate sponge?

Doubt it mate. If it where this forum, everything after Tiberian Sun (or RA2:YR, depends who you ask) is heresy and everyone who likes it should be burned, bludgeoned, quartered, hanged, poisoned and tickled to death at the same time.
_________________
Please, read the signature rules of the forum.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Skype Account
Banshee
Supreme Banshee


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Location: Brazil

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not true, Dutchy. Red Alert 3 is awesome and C&C3 is fun, although the story had many flaws.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Skype Account
Orac
President


Joined: 11 Jul 2008
Location: New Zealand

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OrangeNero wrote:
LOL Renegade forget it your walls of text tactic to flood the other wont work. Neither will your twisting words and reality.
[A nine hundred word long rant]

I would like to award you the Self-Awareness prize for extreme self awareness.

Renegade isn't arguing that WW is good.  I've seen a whole lot of comments by Ren which state the exact opposite.

C&C3 is fun but I find the controls a tad sluggish, and the ultra-hard counters of RA3 make it annoyingly unforgiving to play.  Apart from that, both are good games.  Even better with mods.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blubb
General


Joined: 31 Jul 2005

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 11:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dutchygamer wrote:
Zengar_Zombolt wrote:
Can I at least have my question below answered.

Does this mean the "New Version Flame" target is now CnCg2f2p22222222 and I can openly like CnC4 without being burned at the stake? Can I have a reasonable conversation without it turning into a Official CnC forum flame war of attrition wtich I lose for only having one voice? Can I not have to rely on people who go on wild tangents (i.e. nero)  for back up?

Can I also openly like RA3 and anything released on a console for the above because G2f2p22222222 is now the CnC fan irrational hate sponge?

Doubt it mate. If it where this forum, everything after Tiberian Sun (or RA2:YR, depends who you ask) is heresy and everyone who likes it should be burned, bludgeoned, quartered, hanged, poisoned and tickled to death at the same time.


judget by renegade , yes.
_________________

Hydraw Art on Facebook

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blubb
General


Joined: 31 Jul 2005

PostPosted: Sun Sep 22, 2013 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oh, nevermind
_________________

Hydraw Art on Facebook

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zengar_Zombolt
Plasma Trooper


Joined: 30 Apr 2008

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 4:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Considering I;m The sites only hosted ra3 modder, and a shoddy one at that. I'm surviving off bibbers, maldin and EA's scraps.

It's suffering being an Ra3 modder.
_________________
I am Zengar Zombolt, The Sword That Cleaves Evil!

There is Nothing I can not Cut!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Banshee
Supreme Banshee


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Location: Brazil

PostPosted: Mon Sep 23, 2013 5:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You were not forgotten, Zengar. But I still have a long path ahead until I manage to release something that will make most of the resources posted at this place become useful for you.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Skype Account
Zengar_Zombolt
Plasma Trooper


Joined: 30 Apr 2008

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I mean I have not a computer at the moment to work on RA3. I would shank a third faction to get a fraction of the skill some of the RA2 and TS modders here.
_________________
I am Zengar Zombolt, The Sword That Cleaves Evil!

There is Nothing I can not Cut!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dutchygamer
President


Joined: 18 Jun 2005
Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 5:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Banshee wrote:
Not true, Dutchy. Red Alert 3 is awesome and C&C3 is fun, although the story had many flaws.

That may be your opinion, but if I look at the amount of stuff going on for TS/RA2 modding compared to Generals/C&C3/RA3, especially hosted mod related I say otherwise.
_________________
Please, read the signature rules of the forum.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Skype Account
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 5:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dutchygamer wrote:
Banshee wrote:
Not true, Dutchy. Red Alert 3 is awesome and C&C3 is fun, although the story had many flaws.

That may be your opinion, but if I look at the amount of stuff going on for TS/RA2 modding compared to Generals/C&C3/RA3, especially hosted mod related I say otherwise.


Ya know 2D games are often easier to mod than 3D ones. And old games are around for longer because they are uh old. Generals has a huge mod community, maybe not here but definitely on moddb.
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Banshee
Supreme Banshee


Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Location: Brazil

PostPosted: Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PPM has attracted more TS/RA2 modders than Generals, but it doesn't restricts itself to TS/RA2. If anyone requests hosting to an interesting Generals project here, we'll gladly host it and do what is in our range to make it become more known at other community places.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Skype Account
Renegade
Cyborg Artillery


Joined: 21 May 2006
Location: Hamburg, Germany

PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OrangeNero wrote:
LOL Renegade forget it your walls of text tactic to flood the other wont work. Neither will your twisting words and reality.

You mean "actually working with facts instead of pussying out and screaming blanket insults"?

OrangeNero wrote:
You say Generals has no familiar units? So apparently the USA has nothing in common with the GDI huh. LOL

I have explained this particular point in the previous post. Read it again as often as necessary for you to understand it.

OrangeNero wrote:
You talk about 2 originally established franchises Tiberium and RA. That is completely wrong you idiot. There once was only Tiberium and then they expanded it to 3. RA2 is NOT part of the original story which is hilarious because most of what we argue could be applied to that game as well but hey you just don't want to admit it, fine.

So where, exactly, leaves your supposed reality Red Alert at the time of Tiberian Sun's release?

OrangeNero wrote:
Your entire wall of text comes down to this: All the progression in the core features is betrayal.

No, it doesn't.

Which is why it would be a waste of my precious spare time to invest more time into replying to you.
You have demonstrated above already that you apparently didn't quite get my post. This is indisputable proof of that.

Go read my post again, as often as is necessary for you to understand the simple statements it makes.

If you have finally arrived at the current point of discussion next week, I will be happy to continue showing how ignorant and far from reality to you are.

As long as you're stuck in last week, I have already said everything that needed to be said in last week's post.

Banshee wrote:
@Renegade and blubb: Command & Conquer franchise belongs to EA, so they decide what will receive the Command & Conquer stamp and, dispite the generic RTS looking and lack relationship of Generals with other C&C games in terms of storyline, gameplay, user interface, etc... they decided that it would sell if it is considered a Command & Conquer game. Of course, we don't need to agree with their decisions. Generals 2 is just as Command & Conquer as Generals.

I'm glad we're in agreement, but I'm not sure why you're telling me the same thing I said?  Confused

@Orac: Your link does not work. The target URL uses POST parameters to determine the search result, you cannot call it through GET.
_________________
#RenProj on chat.freenode.net

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You've been proven wrong and of being butthurt now be a good kitty and suck it down.

Ladies and Gentlemen I present you our newest weekly episode of "Rengade and why Generals has nothing to do with C&C".

Stay tuned for our newest episode scheduled for next week with more nonsense and more "go read my last BS again" arguments and maybe a return of our all time favorite:"familiar units? nope".
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OrangeNero
Commander


Joined: 11 Jan 2012

PostPosted: Sun Sep 29, 2013 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Funny thing is I brought this discussion further, you didn't answer or reply to a single thing. instead you tell me to go read your old shit and tell me that I am the one stuck in last week? lol.

"I can't wait for your next attack, General. Can we expect it today?"
_________________
Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade!

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 3 of 4 [180 Posts] Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » PPM Zone » PPM Discussion Zone » Site Sections
Jump to:  
Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on DiggShare on RedditShare on PInterestShare on Del.icio.usShare on Stumble Upon
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group

Wildcard SSL Certificates
[ Time: 0.4102s ][ Queries: 11 (0.0124s) ][ Debug on ]