The Empire structures are built in the place of the core (Using nanites I guess).
I assume the Nanocore contained the nanites used to build the structure since the structure unfurls (I assume it releases nanites) and the structure materialises over the unfurled core.
But the size of big structures like the Decimator or Mainframe Core seems to suggest there couldn't possibly be enough nanites concentrated in the Nanocore's body to build something like that...
Then again UAW was like that too... nanite-built structures had nanites originating from an even smaller source: a little robot. Still UAW gains points from me for having a nicer, more nanite-ish materialising fx for the structures. _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
A game called Axis & Allies shows a fairly realistic gameplay. Some buildings establish a supply radius which you must build your sturctures in (or outside, but you can't build shit if the buildings don't receive supplies). The buildings come packed in trucks that you build from your HQ (also comes as a truck). These truck then drive to the given location and expand into a platform that slowly grows to a building (RA3 Soviet style). _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 28 Sep 2005 Location: Mixing psilocybin in your drinks.
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:35 am Post subject:
Dominant, did you have to find every single thing that could possibly be wrong in the view of the realism-addicted fanboys?
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
I'm sick of the streamlined crap of the new C&Cs. If was to play C&C3 without any prior knowledge of TD or TS, I'd probably like it more; as of right now, I find C&C 3 to be okay, but its blasphemous. RA3 is fun to play, but, when you compare it to RA1, its gay. You think, what the hell happened with this franchise? Oh right, RA2. Again, RA2 is a fun game, I play it to this day, but its blasphemous.
So... how exactly are they "blasphemous"?
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
I'd love to see a C&C game actually show off the build system in a semi-realistic in-theory way.
No. If they tried that they'd lose focus on the parts of the game you actually use.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
I always imagined that a tunnel complex is created shortly after the MCV deploys (drilling platforms, you've all seen that animation where a crane picks up a box and it dissapears, sometimes into the ground? THATS what I'm talkin about), so there would be lots of automated digging and drilling, this would all be happening while you play, in fact its purely a cosmetic addition to the game, you see the drills when they're above ground, but you can't select it or anything.
In order for the MCV system to be more semi-realistic, the time to dig the tunnels and make the structures would have to be alot longer.
Are you serious? Why do you care? Does it bug you THAT much? Is an RTS not perfect unless they show you exactly how a structure is being built? Is it possible for you to leave your nonsense out of these topics and leave people like us to enjoy the game? I believe people like you are called "trolls".
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
The Con Yard creates a compact structure, a box; its crane sends the box down to the complex, then out, then up, then it deploys. This could have been applied to RA3, like this:
- The Soviets would do what I just described, but the conyard would send out a drilling vehicle to the build spot, and start digging to connect with the underground network, but instead of a compact structure box, it sends in the parts in a more standard way.
- The Allies just stick with making the tunnel by using solely the Conyard, but to make the structure seem to appear almost instantly on the spot, proton beams are used to completely vaporize the the dirt, or something like that.
- EotRS, EA actually depicted their way of making structures. No changes needed.
Uhh...... wow. You give FAR too much thought into this. Makes me glad you're not on EALA's design team. Making the game balanced and making it play well is FAR more important than these (literally) insignificant nitpicks.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Are they (the ones local to you) really that bad? If so, do tell; I love stories (SHORT ones, at least) about douchebags and turd sandwiches.
You're out of your mind if you think anyone will take you seriously after that comment.
If the designers of the earliest PC or even console games tried to make the games look as awesome and realistic as possible instead of focusing on gameplay, the video game industry would have stayed down with the 80s games crash. How about this; just because a developer company can make something look super-awesome and realistic doesn't mean they should, because they'd lose focus on improving the rest of the experience. Crysis is a perfect example of this; there's a somewhat-true joke that Crysis is just a benchmark disguised as a game and there's a very good reason for that.
If I wanted a realistic game I'd buy a simulator or even The Sims/Sim City. But I don't because the more realistic you make these things, the more repetitive, dry, and BORING it gets. Stuff like C&C and Unreal Tournament succeed because they're just good fun, they never incorporate any reasonable amount of realism (especially the Red Alert and Tiberian/Tiberium franchises), and the gameplay outclasses pretty much anything realistic.
Tl;dr, shut up until you realize that gameplay > graphics, and that EALA are actually doing an excellent job with the franchise. _________________
[quote="DCoder"]There is no sanity left in this thread.[/quote] QUICK_EDIT
Think the commanders are going to becoming like subfactions? And do you think they are going to be available in skirmish? _________________ Please, read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:36 am Post subject:
Sir Modsalot wrote:
Does my post at least make sense now?
It always did. I just hope you understand my comments.
You see, I wasn't posting because I was angry at EA's direction; I was posting my slight disappointment.
- - -
For subfactions, no, they probably wont be added. The subfactions in KW, I don't think they were very successful. From my experience, it upset the balance in some areas. One game review I read about KW even said that the time and effort for making the subfactions could have been used elsewhere.
Then again, EA is reusing some features from past games. The challenge mod, this will be like the 3rd time its reused. So subfactions could be in. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
the little interview said that you would be stealing commander's techs throughout the challenge. I thought this kinda implied subfactions, or atleast unique units. _________________ Please, read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 6:28 am Post subject:
Its stale, is what I'm saying. Innovation is awesome. I know, its tough to think up something totally new and unique.
- - -
Stealing tech? That sounds cool. Espionage missions, with the Allied Spy, or Empire Shinobi. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
"You beat the tank general, you can build tanks!!11!1"
I'd rather have them take what was good from the past and perfect it rather than have something wild that could flop.
The UI of TW was utter perfection, the greatest I have ever seen in any game. Most people would probably take it for granted, but I see it as the most important part of RTS, it's how you control your units. While I like taking whats good from the past, I am disliking how it's always the same kinda group of units with different skins. I want some actually friggin diversity in the unit roster. Not every faction having a the same set with different skins. Look at TD. There was alot of asymmetry there. Look at the TW. All three sides were pretty identical. Not every side needs a tier 3 heavy unit!
Zero Hour was pretty good with it's subfactions. Added alot of variety and strategic diversity. I especially loved it when they would take a unit away, forcing the player to use strategies other than tank rush and whatnot. _________________ Please, read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 28 Sep 2005 Location: Mixing psilocybin in your drinks.
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:59 pm Post subject:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Its stale, is what I'm saying. Innovation is awesome. I know, its tough to think up something totally new and unique.
So, by that logic, Westwood would be stale for re-using the basic engine components from the first Red Alert over and over (iirc it was re-used and modified for different functions all the way up to Yuri's Revenge). _________________
[quote="DCoder"]There is no sanity left in this thread.[/quote] QUICK_EDIT
No, D2k is its own engine, TD, RA, SS share similar engines, TS-FS and RA2-YR also share, Renegade was a off branch, Gen and Zero Hour share the first carnation of the SAGE, TW and KW share SAGE-2, and RA3-Uprising share the RNA.
One thing these all have in common though is the basic Westwood Library, holding file systems and such. Renegade off branched the WWLib with the W3D engine, what in turn also went back and joined to SAGE in some way for Generals. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 7:39 pm Post subject:
Sir Modsalot wrote:
So, by that logic, Westwood would be stale for re-using the basic engine components from the first Red Alert over and over (iirc it was re-used and modified for different functions all the way up to Yuri's Revenge).
You'd think so, but no. TD/RA1, similar looking. TS looks way different, even if they based off of the original engine, It looks better. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
The UI of TW was utter perfection, the greatest I have ever seen in any game.
I could think of some ways to improve it though.
Most notably in the area regarding unit abilities. When you have a bunch of units, you can only see the abilities of one unit type.
IMO it would be better if there was somehow a way to have the abilties of all currently selected unit types displayed for convenience. Think something like what UAW did.
Also, the downgrade to 4 ability slots per unit was pretty sad (and got even sadder with RA3's further downgrade to ONE ability slot per unit) _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:00 am Post subject:
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Sir Modsalot wrote:
So, by that logic, Westwood would be stale for re-using the basic engine components from the first Red Alert over and over (iirc it was re-used and modified for different functions all the way up to Yuri's Revenge).
You'd think so, but no. TD/RA1, similar looking. TS looks way different, even if they based off of the original engine, It looks better.
But that was last generation, I had no expectations for my proposed level of detail at that time.
Remember when there was no C&C3? But how there was mention of Tiberian Twilight, that mystical concept of a game? Then I learned of a fan making his own Tiberian Twilight, called TW: Initiative. He had an amazing concept, such immense NEW stuff planned, total asymmetrical gameplay, great graphics, and excellent faction specific detail... but it got canceled.
... EA's C&C3 isn't that great. It's pretty basic. I mean, this is the next gen, FFS... All I'm saying is, it could be MUCH better. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
Neither will SCII or DOWII be "that great" either. But Blizzard is welcome to prove me wrong by not going ahead with that whole pay for battlenet thing
Expectations these days are so high that every little thing gets jumped on like it was a game-breaking issue. See 2 posts up I'm critiquing the UI of C&C 3...
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
this is the next gen, FFS... All I'm saying is, it could be MUCH better.
Could say that for every other title that comes out in this next-gen age frankly... Spore for instance, could've been better... it didn't (it got dumbed down, and I chose not to get it).
Standards were lower in the previous generation precisely because games were simpler then. These days games have more complicated features and there are that many more ways to screw up in one way or another. But of course nobody wants to go back to the previous generation. _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 28 Sep 2005 Location: Mixing psilocybin in your drinks.
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 6:29 pm Post subject:
Why did you quote yourself to reply a second time, Hunter? o_0
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
But that was last generation, I had no expectations for my proposed level of detail at that time.
Fair enough.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
Remember when there was no C&C3? But how there was mention of Tiberian Twilight, that mystical concept of a game? Then I learned of a fan making his own Tiberian Twilight, called TW: Initiative. He had an amazing concept, such immense NEW stuff planned, total asymmetrical gameplay, great graphics, and excellent faction specific detail... but it got canceled.
Fan-made works always seem to get more positive attention, but they just don't seem to have the spirit that the original, official game has.
DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr wrote:
... EA's C&C3 isn't that great. It's pretty basic. I mean, this is the next gen, FFS... All I'm saying is, it could be MUCH better.
It's not as next-gen as you think. It's not like consoles where every 2-3 years there's a huge leap, then things get polished. PC games have always seemed to sit on a steady, gradual evolutionary development. It's more of a next-gen franchise than a next-gen game, and if you think about it that way, then it seems much more polished. If EA wanted to make their C&C 3 as good as you think it could have been, they would have thrown out the modified SAGE engine and kept us waiting even now while they worked out an entirely new one, as well as re-writing the whole thing around the new engine. It could have been much better, sure, but would you rather be kept waiting even now with only concept pics of units that might not even make the final cut? _________________
[quote="DCoder"]There is no sanity left in this thread.[/quote] QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 28 Sep 2005 Location: Mixing psilocybin in your drinks.
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:34 pm Post subject:
Such a simple response brings me to say that as someone that expects more than he should from the developing industry, even during this economic disaster, all the new releases have me jaded. Too many games copy too many aspects and take themselves too seriously.
Red Alert 3: Uprising is EXACTLY what the RTS genre in general needs, especially with EALA saying they're looking to provide multiplayer sometime in the future. That's because Red Alert doesn't take itself seriously, especially with the FMVs, and it focuses on making the experience fun and balanced. Even better, it combines both of those aspects to exponentially increase the experience. Best of all, it succeeds brilliantly at doing exactly that. The variable is continued support from EALA, which we've seen improve since RA3's release.
While I'd love to try Starcraft 2 when it comes out, something tells me it wouldn't be as memorable as RA3. It might be really fun and really balanced, and knowing Blizzard it would be kept that way, but to achieve that it suffers from a fatal flaw; Blizzard is trying TOO hard. The result will reflect the effort, but how long have we been waiting now? It's ridiculous. _________________
[quote="DCoder"]There is no sanity left in this thread.[/quote] QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 16 Feb 2005 Location: North America Posts: You cannot comprehend...
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 10:58 pm Post subject:
I quoted myself for a simple reason; to get noticed. If I was to edit my previous post.... its the previous post, unless you've never read this thread before, its not going to get glanced at again. I ran out of time to continue that previous post.
You raise a valid point, and yes, EA's support is good, they are trying. I guess I never looked at it in that its a next gen franchise. From a marketing perspective, it makes sense; it introduces more players to C&C.
But I could wait. I wouldn't mind waiting for a very innovative game. I'm a patient person.
I do appreciate what EA is doing. They are genuinely supporting their games, which is a great step forward. _________________ Destroy to create. All for the hunt to dominate!
Such a simple response brings me to say that as someone that expects more than he should from the developing industry, even during this economic disaster, all the new releases have me jaded. Too many games copy too many aspects and take themselves too seriously.
Red Alert 3: Uprising is EXACTLY what the RTS genre in general needs, especially with EALA saying they're looking to provide multiplayer sometime in the future. That's because Red Alert doesn't take itself seriously, especially with the FMVs, and it focuses on making the experience fun and balanced. Even better, it combines both of those aspects to exponentially increase the experience. Best of all, it succeeds brilliantly at doing exactly that. The variable is continued support from EALA, which we've seen improve since RA3's release.
While I'd love to try Starcraft 2 when it comes out, something tells me it wouldn't be as memorable as RA3. It might be really fun and really balanced, and knowing Blizzard it would be kept that way, but to achieve that it suffers from a fatal flaw; Blizzard is trying TOO hard. The result will reflect the effort, but how long have we been waiting now? It's ridiculous.
You're forgetting the main thing. It takes them so ztyping long to remake StarCraft in 3d.
And it still looks like the old StarCraft.
Someone putted SC I and SC II screenshots next to eachother, the SCII resized to 640x480. SAME ztyping GAME. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 28 Sep 2005 Location: Mixing psilocybin in your drinks.
Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 11:47 pm Post subject:
I know that. My point is that by the time they finish, some other developer may have something better, though that's unlikely. I really hope it lives up to everything people are saying it will be, so that RTS games will have a new standard against which they must be measured. _________________
[quote="DCoder"]There is no sanity left in this thread.[/quote] QUICK_EDIT
You're forgetting the main thing. It takes them so ztyping long to remake StarCraft in 3d.
And it still looks like the old StarCraft.
Someone putted SC I and SC II screenshots next to eachother, the SCII resized to 640x480. SAME ztyping GAME.
RA3 kinda looks like RA2 too... when I saw the first few pics one of the initial things I noticed was how the bright green grass seemed to match the grass of RA2 as well, and of course there's the level of colour saturation, both are quite similar too
Latest screens of SCII give me the impression that its cliffs look like RA3's cliffs.
Nobody notice pic 1 was a Yuriko Omega factory?
Hmm... I wonder what this could mean... His psychic baldness returns? Or has meerly had genes stolen by stragely high-tech Japanese scientists and implanted into clones schoolgirls? _________________ Yes, work on MV continues. It is not forgotten. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 18 Jun 2005 Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:22 pm Post subject:
Albrecht, stop talking bullshit: that head is a mobile version of the platform, which in turn is a deployable defensive structure. The head self has a beam weapon fired from the mouth... QUICK_EDIT
Ok... second screenshot....
Either those are yuriko omegas or thats where rocket angels come from.
_________________ Yes, work on MV continues. It is not forgotten. QUICK_EDIT
that does look a lot like SC installation tileset.
I do like they explore characters back story, and use that to play around with that rather than blanket plots of USvsTHEM.
I can't say RA3 storyline holds characters with "deep" appeal or intricate backstories as say with SC universe. _________________ Delirium.. QUICK_EDIT
that does look a lot like SC installation tileset.
I do like they explore characters back story, and use that to play around with that rather than blanket plots of USvsTHEM.
I can't say RA3 storyline holds characters with "deep" appeal or intricate backstories as say with SC universe.
In the history of C&C, I think only Kane comes remotely close to being a character with "deep" appeal or intricate backstories" after all in all Tiberian games he's the only recurring character, and always has a major role in the story.
As to how exactly EA is going to handle Yuriko's backstory I have little confidence in something satisfying. KW did a remarkably unsatisfactory job of bridging the gap between TS and C&C 3. At the end of it all we still don't know the link between Kane and CABAL, or how the Tiberium evolved, or why Kane still has a faceplate if his face healed.
With RA3 though, being all silly and nonsensical to begin with, a paper-thin backstory wouldn't be frowned upon as much. _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
I don't like RA3. But I don't want to whine about it, because enough people already are.
I'll keep it short:
I've put off learning 3DsMax until a decently moddable C&C comes out. If RA3U is moddable then I'll buy it. I no longer buy C&C games for the story (I still haven't bought KW.), and the only thing left that makes me want another C&C game is the ability to change it to fit my vision. QUICK_EDIT
Think you may be better off modding some other RTS which already has good modding capabilities. If you restrict it to a C&C-based RTS, who knows how long you'll have to wait... _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
I know.
I just haven't found any 3D game worth modding yet.
Some are just too perfect to improve (I can only think of one, and I've mapped for that),
some are too limited (Most I haven't bought),
some have terrible gameplay (Which means tweaking the existing units, not creating new ones).
I was hoping for RA3 to have the perfect mix of things I like and things I hate, but maybe I'd be better off starting with Generals. QUICK_EDIT
Generals could be a decent game if the resource issues were fixed. If the Generals issue was fixed it'd be a C&C By that I mean no C&C factions, and too many commies/yankeys/jihadis. _________________ Yes, work on MV continues. It is not forgotten. QUICK_EDIT
And here goes the anti-EA bashing again. Be goddamn happy they still make these games
As much as i like bashing EA for being copy cats. the expandtion pack should be interesting Okay so who cares if the units are like too stupid. the point is its funny and somthing a really notied about the game as it has toned down that corny RA2 humor.
don't mean to be rude but i can't stand bad acting i know its ment to be corny and over acted but hey RA2 could of put me off for life, but then RA3 came along and changed my mind.
to be honest i liked the Ra3 game its really something sorry but i am hooked. Okay so its not real history but who gives a hoot, as long as we can blow stuff up right guys/ girls ? _________________ Link to a document to see what mods i have and/or working on or working with
Click QUICK_EDIT
since i played RA 3 now and found it to bee seizuring a bit too much ...as much as i have a favor for the empire side (yeah i like them quite for a new faction) it's far too much comedy going on here.
I find the game not even funny, it's just annoying how the actors desperately try to make you laugh o_O _________________ Hydraw Art on Facebook QUICK_EDIT
wow. gay game is gay. Thing that turned me off? acting. Terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE acting. And the tutorial. ztyping 3 tanks from each faction talking to each other and interacting like human beings, even saying "ow" when shot, and having the soviet tank be a complete retard. WHAT THE F U C K EA. You EPIC FAIL. You ruined YET ANOTHER of my favorite universes. go ztype yourself.
And seriously, Uprising? how long did that take EA? _________________ You come for the modding but you stay for the Crap Forum. QUICK_EDIT
wow. gay game is gay. Thing that turned me off? acting. Terrible, terrible, TERRIBLE acting. And the tutorial. ztyping 3 tanks from each faction talking to each other and interacting like human beings, even saying "ow" when shot, and having the soviet tank be a complete retard. WHAT THE F U C K EA. You EPIC FAIL. You ruined YET ANOTHER of my favorite universes. go ztype yourself.
And seriously, Uprising? how long did that take EA?
ACH, I AM CHERDENKO, I WILL BECOME EVIL. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
You cannot post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You can edit your posts in this forum You can delete your posts in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
...as much as i have a favor for the empire side (yeah i like them quite for a new faction) it's far too much comedy going on here.
