Also Known As: banshee_revora (Steam) Joined: 15 Aug 2002 Location: Brazil
Posted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:18 pm Post subject:
Command & Conquer's fate has been set.
Subject description: Kane will still live in death... but just in death, it seems.
Thank you for your participation over the last few months in the Command & Conquer closed alpha test. It’s been much appreciated, and you’ve been instrumental in helping define what a new Command & Conquer experience should and shouldn’t be.
Part of being in a creative team is the understanding that not all of your choices are going to work out. In this case, we shifted the game away from campaign mode and built an economy-based, multiplayer experience. Your feedback from the alpha trial is clear: We are not making the game you want to play. That is why, after much difficult deliberation, we have decided to cease production of this version of the game. Although we deeply respect the great work done by our talented team, ultimately it’s about getting you the game you expect and deserve.
Over the next 10 days we will be refunding any and all money spent in the alpha. If you have a question about your refund, please contact help.ea.com.
We believe that Command & Conquer is a powerful franchise with huge potential and a great history, and we are determined to get the best game made as soon as possible. To that end, we have already begun looking at a number of alternatives to get the game back on track. We look forward to sharing more news about the franchise as it develops. Thank you again for your participation and support.
- Victory Studios
That's it and take your own conclusions. I'm just worried for the people who has worked on this project. QUICK_EDIT
So they are wanting to shift the game back to singleplayer? I can't say that it isn't welcome; EA seems to consider only multiplayer all the time. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 18 Jun 2005 Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Posted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:31 pm Post subject:
1) Ditch the F2P / payment system.
2) Ditch the frakking FPS engine and use an RTS engine.
3) Focus on both SP and MP, not just MP where rushfags decide the game.
4) Get the dev team to play (and maybe analyse) Generals and Zero Hour so they know where the story ended, and can come up with a proper follow-up story.
5) Same as 4, but for the gameplay. No ripping off from StarCraft or whatever. Hell, maybe even ditch the dozer system and replace with ConYard system.
Some stuff they might want to consider if they are going to start over again. QUICK_EDIT
5) Same as 4, but for the gameplay. No ripping off from StarCraft or whatever. Hell, maybe even ditch the dozer system and replace with ConYard system.
Joined: 18 Jun 2005 Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Posted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:34 pm Post subject:
Martin Killer wrote:
Dutchygamer wrote:
5) Same as 4, but for the gameplay. No ripping off from StarCraft or whatever. Hell, maybe even ditch the dozer system and replace with ConYard system.
BAD BAD BAD
What part? The not-ripping-from-other-RTS or the replace-dozers-with-MCV? QUICK_EDIT
I have to respect them for being willing to pull the plug when things are clearly not working out. I wonder what will actually come out of this F2P experiment. QUICK_EDIT
Well isn't this unexpected. I actually thought Generals 2 was looking rather good. If EA had listened to fans in 2003, there would be no Generals.
As for dozers/MCV, there are plenty of other ways to do it, so why only choose between two? I liked how for example in Axis & Allies (Atari) you build trucks from your Corps HQ ("Con Yard" or "Command Centre) that deploy into Regiment HQs - i.e. War factories and alike. _________________ Last edited by Crimsonum on Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:54 pm; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
Keep the main aspects of CNC intact and ditch the battlefield engine. Its way too intensive for an RTS game. Also, embrace modding community. Even the older command and conquer games still have communities because of user made maps and mods.
Update the old sage engine, bringing it up to date and working out its current limitations and performance constraints. The engine looked great in command and conquer 3. Most computers sold today can run it decently enough to play it as well. Battlefields engine on the other hand is both GPU intensive and even worse heavily CPU intensive which is harder to dial back using graphical sliders. My desktop can easily handle the battlefield engine (3770k, gtx560) but my laptop core 2 duo 2.53 and 9600m gt would definitely struggle. I have no problem playing source games, command and conquer 3, renegade, and many other first person shooters.
On that note I am a little disappointed that I never tried out the alpha version. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 18 Jun 2005 Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Posted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 9:02 pm Post subject:
Crimsonum wrote:
Well isn't this unexpected. I actually thought Generals 2 was looking rather good. If EA had listened to fans in 2003, there would be no Generals.
As for dozers/MCV, there are plenty of other ways to do it, so why only choose between two? I liked how for example in Axis & Allies (Atari) you build trucks from your Corps HQ ("Con Yard" or "Command Centre) that deploy into Regiment HQs - i.e. War factories and alike.
Like the Nanocore system from the Empire of the Rising Sun from RA3? That works pretty much like you describe it. QUICK_EDIT
Well, EA lost out many years of moneys on this blunder and its ever more doubtful they are taking chances with new C&Cs.
Also SAGE engine is CRAP and outdated! Visually looks shit compared to modern titles gfx engines, while frostbite may have been little too much, falling back to sage woulda been lousy choice. QUICK_EDIT
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/n4mtscdk9262pbf/KE6-8NfDaQ this was posted moments ago, the whole material may shed some light on the matter....though it looks more like a bitchfest and indeed like the "i want everything like 1995" people...
edit: but the ultimate reason seems to be the monthly fee model. _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Can't say I'm surprised. People whining about nothing and shit gets pulled. Bravo.
Though, to be fair, a monthly payment schedule is majorly lame. Not that F2P if you have to pay. >.> _________________ KGR | AT
AZUR
Discord: theastronomer1836
Steam QUICK_EDIT
they were bitching even around the live service, which if their payment system was implemented properly would have been an amazing thing...it would have had potential. and alpha testers keep forgetting they're still in alpha so the payment isn't a fixed MUST, they pretty much can experiment with everything they have at this stage...though it's a worrysome direction if they seriously considered a monthly fee...still...open for discussion _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
Well, EA lost out many years of moneys on this blunder and its ever more doubtful they are taking chances with new C&Cs.
Also SAGE engine is CRAP and outdated! Visually looks shit compared to modern titles gfx engines, while frostbite may have been little too much, falling back to sage woulda been lousy choice.
Sage still a lot better than Alamo and at least RNA they use in Ra3/C&c4 look a lot better and require less machine performance compare to graphic i saw in new C&C and it even play better. :p
i dont know if they still intent to make another c&c games since RTS genre [specialize old school rts] seem to meet the end in this gen... [tower defense and MOBA everywhere]
however i feel sorry for Victory game. they not even release any game... QUICK_EDIT
Shit gaming first EoN and now this and wargame is still shit and rome has still a shit broken AI so there's NOT A SINGLE good rts atm. Not one. _________________ Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade! QUICK_EDIT
Well, with no truuuuu cee und cee fan wanting to play it, who would? I mean it liek anyone would want to try cee und cee? _________________ I am Zengar Zombolt, The Sword That Cleaves Evil! There is Nothing I can not Cut! QUICK_EDIT
if they wanted to know what the community wanted, all they'd have to do is look at the mods people are making.
they could have made something like Tiberian Sun Rising, and make a bunch of money - and fan support
In other words, make the same thing in 3D. Wow, what a unique idea.
i think that's what every game sequel should be, just make the old game as better version include new feature [or possible with some innovation feature]. not to make it become completely different type of game with same name. and when i play c&c i expect it play like c&c not COH , WIC or DOTA QUICK_EDIT
i think that's what every game sequel should be, just make the old game as better version include new feature [or possible with some innovation feature]. not to make it become completely different type of game with same name. and when i play c&c i expect it play like c&c not COH , WIC or DOTA
I totally agree, that's the biggest problem with some games. They give it the same name while the gameplay differs a lot. (for example C&C4, scrapping the most important gameplay features. Those that define C&C)
Generals also did things a bit different with it's building system and such but it's okay because the changes are made to a new series.
So like Holy Master said, making a sequel should be about making the earlier game better. Adding more fun and interesting features but keep the gameplay that marks the game.
If you really want to use another main gameplay mechanic, use it in a new series. QUICK_EDIT
They shouldn't be trying to please fans, just make a good game. As fans have proven with countless of shitty mods all they want in a sequel is the same units from older games and exactly the same gameplay. You see comments on 'real' TS sequel mods that are only readding the same old boring units from previous games and everyone saying how terrible EA are and how great Westwood were, like some endless fanboy orgy.
There will never be another good C&C game because of the fanbase. QUICK_EDIT
No but all they've been doing is trying to make a game that the fanbase want instead of creating something decent and original. C&CF2P wasn't terrible, it just needed a lot of polish. People DID whine about there being a second resource, which was a good thing IMO, and they removed it... people were complaining about the very idea of the game, no immediate campaigns, free2play etc and they cancelled it. QUICK_EDIT
Let's wait and see if EA will suddenly close more studios before they manage to finish the games they're working on. Feedback doesn't simply kill the game before it is released, and the studio that was working on it, but a dying company desperately trying to save money does.
It might also be that EA simply considers CnC (and all RTS games?) as a totally niche market, and they are simply abandoning anything that they don't think appeals to the widest audience possible. QUICK_EDIT
Cancelling C&C FTP only lost EA tons of money, so I can't see how that move did anything positive for them. If their F2P plan didn't work out, they could've at the very least just switched back to a more traditional method for getting paid (just sell the game and release some expansion packs/DLCs later on) and they'd at least have earned back the money they put in the development of the game. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 26 Apr 2003 Location: Somewhere in Germany
Posted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:24 pm Post subject:
Bittah Commander wrote:
Cancelling C&C FTP only lost EA tons of money, so I can't see how that move did anything positive for them.
Agreed. Even though it was far from finished, the money needed to continue development until early 2014 when it was supposed to be "released" would likely have been less than the income it would have generated eventually.
Cancelling it at this stage seems like a lose-lose situation. Very strange decision. QUICK_EDIT
There will never be another good C&C game because of the fanbase.
This. And it's something even I will admit I'm guilty of, for one reason or another.
The bestcase scenario really in this situation seems to be at least giving the IP a break and then coming back later with a fresh start - it worked for Generals/Zero Hour. And last I heard, Victory did also have plans for a new setting. Would have been interesting to see what said setting would have been.
That said, EA did lose a truckload of money in the pot with this one, so it's entirely possible with the explosive reception C&C 4* got that the IP could be considered toxic.
*I didn't say "Sales Figures" because apparently it managed to top a few charts, somehow. Take with pinch of salt however as my attempt to track exact figures took me to a Canadian Pharmacy site. On a related note, C&C 4 did have lower critical ratings compared with RA3, and RA3 was (barely) rated lower than C&C 3 (The metacritic scores being 64, 82 and 85 respectively - this being the total score for Critic Reviews, not User Reviews, which are even lower). QUICK_EDIT
*I didn't say "Sales Figures" because apparently it managed to top a few charts, somehow.
It still sold significantly less than previous titles AFAIK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_PC_games According to that list C&C1, RA1, TS, RA2 and C&C3 have sold at least 1 million (tbh I'm surprised Generals isn't on that list.. I guess it's possible it has sold that much but there simply hasn't been an announcement about it). Viewing that list it seems C&C was doing best around RA1, TS initially managed to sell well with the massive amount of hype (although many of its buyers got disappointed -> it didn't sell well for as long as RA1 did) and after that C&C sales have been declining. _________________ CnCNet Client | CnCNet TS patches | More Quality-of-Life Improvements for RA Remastered
Last edited by ^Rampastein on Wed Oct 30, 2013 9:55 pm; edited 2 times in total QUICK_EDIT
Dying? EA? They have the most selling game series I know.
They also spend far too much money acquiring the competition.
Reviews and criticism didn't kill this game, though there are alot of fans (apparently) that don't like the Generals universe (who knew).
On a related note, any time people sell their company to EA, they might as well be firing all of their current staff, as EA will do if for them sooner than later. _________________ "Don't beg for things; Do it yourself or you'll never get anything." QUICK_EDIT
It still sold significantly less than previous titles AFAIK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_PC_games According to that list C&C1, RA1, TS, RA2 and C&C3 have sold at least 1 million (tbh I'm surprised Generals isn't on that list.. I guess it's possible it has sold that much but there simply hasn't been an announcement about it). Viewing that list it seems C&C was doing best around RA1, TS initially managed to sell well with the massive amount of hype (although many of its buyers got disappointed -> it didn't sell well for as long as RA1 did) and after that C&C sales have been declining.
I thought that looked a bit questionable when it was mentioned, thanks for clearing that up.
4StarGeneral wrote:
Reviews and criticism didn't kill this game, though there are alot of fans (apparently) that don't like the Generals universe (who knew).
In regards to C&C F2P, there was an updated post from one of the Dev's saying that Backroom Politics is essentially what killed them.
In regards to not liking Generals though, I am one of those people - at least from a Story perspective. A lot of people forget that the original Generals was released scant days before the Invasion of Iraq (the kicker? The opening USA mission is set in Baghdad, and has you trying to take out a SCUD Storm. Talk about awkward). And it was a game about Gung Ho Heroic Americans beating up a Middle Eastern Terrorist Organisation, with China riding along as a Sidekick. In shorthand - it was Team America: World Police played completely straight.
Note that the above is basically the story to the original Generals, not Zero Hour*. That said, the universe is basically Call of Duty: The RTS with it's ripped from the headlines material and (at least in the original Generals) it's sense of Gung Ho patriotism.
*For the record, I'm okay with Zero Hour, and the gameplay from both is good. I just don't like the setting and feel they should have gone with a new C&C setting. QUICK_EDIT
It might also be that EA simply considers CnC (and all RTS games?) as a totally niche market, and they are simply abandoning anything that they don't think appeals to the widest audience possible.
Well I wonder why?
Team Black wrote:
Crim wrote:
In other words, make the same thing in 3D. Wow, what a unique idea.
They's still please many more fans than they have with their latest C&C games
CnC Fans<RTS fans(numbers wise) _________________ I am Zengar Zombolt, The Sword That Cleaves Evil! There is Nothing I can not Cut! QUICK_EDIT
*I didn't say "Sales Figures" because apparently it managed to top a few charts, somehow.
It still sold significantly less than previous titles AFAIK.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_PC_games According to that list C&C1, RA1, TS, RA2 and C&C3 have sold at least 1 million (tbh I'm surprised Generals isn't on that list.. I guess it's possible it has sold that much but there simply hasn't been an announcement about it). Viewing that list it seems C&C was doing best around RA1, TS initially managed to sell well with the massive amount of hype (although many of its buyers got disappointed -> it didn't sell well for as long as RA1 did) and after that C&C sales have been declining.
You can't crunch numbers so simple. A game in the 90s can not compare to one of today. how many gamers where then and how many now? How many used the internet that would hear about the game? How many were living on earth? How much money was put into advertising? How well established was the franchise? Since how long is a game around having time to sell? EA probably had their own goals for C&C, goals they suspected it wouldn't meet, what TD did in sales doesn't matter but hey it made it into hte Guiness book of world records or was it TS or both? _________________ Free Tibed!
EA for worst company of the decade! QUICK_EDIT
You cannot post new topics in this forum You can 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
Command & Conquer's fate has been set.
