Its from someone called trion...not EA.....well, if would be an C&C game...at least they would be in good hands lol.
AFAIK, it's from Petroglyph. Petroglyph is comprised in part of ex-Westwood staff..
It isn't C&C, but it is an interesting thing to watch. Last edited by Orac on Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:50 am; edited 1 time in total QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Location: Maastricht, The Netherlands
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 4:06 am Post subject:
So, this will be an MMORTS?
From petroglyphs, that has many ex-westwood people working in it?
I'm gonna keep my eye on this one.
Looks promising indeed! _________________ QUICK_EDIT
i hope they fixed their Alamo engine already. because in EAW and UAW the game keep slow by no reason [specialize in multiplayer same problem as TS and Ra2] . = =" QUICK_EDIT
I really don't see how producers have anything to do with how good/bad a game is. Seriously guys?
yeah...>_> Well....not ony that for some reason....i get bored of new C&C games very easily (wanted soo much to play RA3 that after some months...or even weeks...got bored >_<i>_< Not that the games from EA suckys....but much things maked me bored of them very easil...(not counting renegade i think and some generals.....) QUICK_EDIT
Again, seriously? EA's proven they're not the bad guys anymore. A change of staff, a change in mentality towards series, and new management towards smaller publishers has payed off for EA. Dead Space, Dragon Age: Origins, Mass Effect 2, Battlefield: Bad Company 2, and plenty more come from EA now and they're all stellar hits.
RA3 is an awesome game, I enjoyed playing the campaign co-op (something new and refreshing for the series) with Sir Modsalot and the game itself is done quite well. A new economy system that works well enough, on top of some very interesting unit abilities has really shown this game was close to being a hit. Oh, wait, it's not what you expected. Throw out all the good. QUICK_EDIT
Again, seriously? EA's proven they're not the bad guys anymore. A change of staff, a change in mentality towards series, and new management towards smaller publishers has payed off for EA. Dead Space, Dragon Age: Origins, Mass Effect 2, Battlefield: Bad Company 2, and plenty more come from EA now and they're all stellar hits.
RA3 is an awesome game, I enjoyed playing the campaign co-op (something new and refreshing for the series) with Sir Modsalot and the game itself is done quite well. A new economy system that works well enough, on top of some very interesting unit abilities has really shown this game was close to being a hit. Oh, wait, it's not what you expected. Throw out all the good.
Well... i never said i hate EA or that they games sucked...i played as single-player the RA3 campaigns....simply after that i really lost my interest, and somehow got bored...not that "OMFG I HATE IT, ztype YOU EA, U RUINED MAH GAME!!11111" but the fact that i still play and enjoy RA2 makes me thinks an westwood game would be better. Much guys say EA suckys soo i should say its contagious...never hated it....never loved it...By the way...if i can recall they maked medal of honor...and well, i love that game soo....EA escaped now. Soo yeah, relax m666/m7.
EDIT: heard an lot of thoses games like mass effect...but never played too soo i don't say a thign lol(?) and lol, never liked much the minerign system in RA3, its too easy and you simply built an refinery in front of it...until its depleted i should say..... QUICK_EDIT
I said new C&C game because the video makes it look like the subtitle is "Cooperate and Conquer" _________________ Please, read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 18 Jun 2005 Location: Dordrecht, the Netherlands
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 9:23 am Post subject:
Keep the EA flaming outta here guys. This is about Petroglyph's new game, not another let's bash EA thread.
Anyways, at the topic at hand: it looks interesting, but then again, MMO mostly means that you must keep paying to keep playing, which I ain't a fan of. QUICK_EDIT
Given Petroglyph's Oh so successful UaW and EaW franchises, I have a great amount of faith in this project.
I would like to see them make something half decent though and do well on it. Would be nice for some original content to spring up that could float. _________________ Victory! QUICK_EDIT
Oh man, it does look good art wise, but everything else is just crap >_>
It's a C&C4-type game and as the poster on that page, theres nothing new that the RTS genre has not already offered, atleast seperately. The monthly fee adds more to the "Do-not-Want" factor. I would play this game if it did not involve a monthly fee.
All in all this game seems like a fun multiplayer retreat, but paying for it monthly is a big turn off.
Also, check out Shattered Galaxy, that old game is an MMORTS as well, it was fun for awhile, but it got old. _________________ Please, I DON'T read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 22 Dec 2004 Location: Tiberium Research Center N27
Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 6:21 pm Post subject:
Yeah, I'll be with the "It's gonna suck" people. Petroglyph might be a good company, but that's just something that a large company, not to mention Petro, will be able to successfully create.
We need EaW sequel with better balance, interface, and engine. _________________ DUNK! QUICK_EDIT
Cartoon show? No dude. It's a ztyping soap opera. It's long, drawn out and pathetic.
m7 wrote:
I really don't see how producers have anything to do with how good/bad a game is. Seriously guys?
Because, quite obviously, they can do no wrong! Bar the fact that every game Petro has released has been a ztyping turd, but that doesn't matter. Ex-Westwood people. MUST BE GOOD BY DEFAULT. Put simply, retarded Westwood fanboys fellating a goddamn corpse.
gufu wrote:
We need EaW sequel with better balance, interface, and engine.
No we don't. EAW was ztyping atrocious. _________________ Because Banshee saw fit to ban my other account for no reason, this is my new one. QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 05 Mar 2007 Location: Less than 10 minutes from the internet
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:42 pm Post subject:
Agreed.
I know I won't buy it because I'm not that interested in it. But I also didn't buy C&C4, or RA3:Uprising (just downloaded the mod that gives you uprising stuff). In fact, it takes a lot from a game to earn me spending mah monehs. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Jan 2007 Location: Maastricht, The Netherlands
Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 7:35 pm Post subject:
but seriously, that game looks pretty damn awesome.
Just heard about the monthly fee though, so, I'll just hope some friend of mine will buy it so I can try it out before even thinking about getting it myself.
I will still keep my eye on it though, because this game looks so interesting.
Huge battles were mentioned _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Monthly fee makes the game an instant no-go for me. Main selling point of the game is huge player count, sort of like how SupCom's selling point was huge zoom and unit count. What also turned me off was the fact that it being an MMO pretty much confirms zero mods for the game
btw the game has no base building and no infantry units. It's pure vehicles and aircraft. You do have a sort of base but it's segregated from the persistent world and can never be attacked (to ensure you don't lose your HQ while you're offline). _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
Monthly fee makes the game an instant no-go for me. Main selling point of the game is huge player count, sort of like how SupCom's selling point was huge zoom and unit count. What also turned me off was the fact that it being an MMO pretty much confirms zero mods for the game
btw the game has no base building and no infantry units. It's pure vehicles and aircraft. You do have a sort of base but it's segregated from the persistent world and can never be attacked (to ensure you don't lose your HQ while you're offline).
lol....soo its going to REALLY be like...lets see.....WoW? as you get offline, all you have stay there? lol, well, it will be released in 2011 i see...soo i can't get soo fascinated to wait. XP QUICK_EDIT
Theres lots of defensive structures in the game play videos, so perhaps there will be some small scale stuff like that. I think a better mechanic for bases would to have a force field go over them while people are offline. _________________ Please, read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
If you didn't like space battles, you have no soul.
I haven't a played a single space-based RTS that I have liked. EAW was no exception. It was terrible. _________________ Because Banshee saw fit to ban my other account for no reason, this is my new one. QUICK_EDIT
Back to EoN, graphics are ugly, scale is small numberwise, and the units seem to take too long to die.
Do not that it is an MMO as well as an RTS, and the fact that there is unit customization, so saying that Units taking too long to do is sort of blunt. _________________ Please, I DON'T read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
Theres lots of defensive structures in the game play videos, so perhaps there will be some small scale stuff like that. I think a better mechanic for bases would to have a force field go over them while people are offline.
C&C 4 had defensive structures too. And it incurred a ton of flak for "lack of base building". Hope you see the point there...
A base in EoN is like a halo Wars base, very localised, very self contained. You will NOT have something like the ability to set up a war factory or barracks anywhere you please on the battlefield.
That's your HQ, it's a separate instance from the battlespace meaning it can never be attacked or threatened. It's your hub, where you perform the purchase and customisation works on your assets.
High Templar X wrote:
gufu wrote:
If you didn't like space battles, you have no soul.
I haven't a played a single space-based RTS that I have liked. EAW was no exception. It was terrible.
You just can't make space work in an RTS. It will never work. It's the equivalent of playing a normal RTS on a map that is 100% flat and featureless. It is the epitome of bland. _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
You just can't make space work in an RTS. It will never work. It's the equivalent of playing a normal RTS on a map that is 100% flat and featureless. It is the epitome of bland.
Total lie. Go play Sins of a Solar Empire, Homeworld 1 and 2, Empire at War, Nexus - The Jupiter Incident.
Especially in Sins, do you have ANY idea how hard it is to get from one end of the galaxy to the other? It's not as simple as warping there. Homeworld 2 had alot of space props, like dead ships and asteroids, and of course, when you're playing an RTS in space , you can't ever say that you wish to see random patches of grass or trees, the beauty of space is what it is, and it's filled with a shitload of things anyway, like nebulas, rocks, planets, stars, and a whole load of other shit you wont find on a piece of land. _________________ Please, I DON'T read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
and it's filled with a shitload of things anyway, like nebulas, rocks, planets, stars, and a whole load of other shit you wont find on a piece of land.
Still, most of it is just empty space with a few particles floating around. It's not like you'd have to maneuver your ship the same way you do with your car on a highway: there just aren't many if any obstacles. _________________ QUICK_EDIT
Obstacles in space is possible, but it'd still be akin to placing rocks and debris on a flat terrestrial map. You won't get to have things like terrain variations. Essentially the map becomes very 2 dimensional
The "beauty" of space is undeniable, that doesn't automatically make space a good setting to wage an RTS war. I'd pick a terrestrial battle over a space battle anyday.
There is so much empty space it's like fighting in a pure water map naval war, with maybe 1 or 2 rocks in the ocean. I could hypothetically recreate that above scenario on a pure water SupCom map with a crapton of naval vessels versus the enemy's crapton of naval vessels.
Adding to the 2-dimensional-ness is the restrictions on movement space. Even though there is a boundless vertical space above and below the main plane, everything still seems to just be positioned on a general XY plane which becomes very obvious when you zoom out, where it becomes clear that only a small portion of a vast 3D battlespace is actually used in combat. Your fleet is always more or less horizontally level with the enemy fleet, you can't send it much lower down the Z-axis to strike them from the bottom or something like that. In this way, it's no different from a generic naval battle where everyone has to stick to the water surface.
You could argue that having a full 3D battlespace like that will be extremely complicated, but without it, a space battle is essentially just a water naval battle with a different scenery backdrop... _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
You could only compare that description with Sins of a Solar Empire, even then, the ships in that game CAN travel on the Y axis, it is just uncontrollable, but in some cases when there is a jump point that is far away, they will realign and go above the normal gravity wells which most of the game's action takes place on.
As for Homeworld, Nexus, ORB, this does not apply.
In both videos, you can see ships in different levels of the Y axis, these games are more focused on space combat unlike Sins, which is more or less a Galactic Empire simulator. _________________ Please, I DON'T read the signature rules of the forum. QUICK_EDIT
Saying that something can be done, yet is uncontrollable, is kind of contradictory. Intuitively, "can be done" should be an implication that I can indeed control a ship to do that at my will.
Yeah Homeworld is better in filling up the 3D space but it's still very much a blank, empty expanse. Everyone has way too much elbow room, which can't be helped since it's in friggin space. That's why I prefer land battles, you get more variety in the battlespace, from chokepoints to garrisonable buildings, to passability variations (a plane can fly over a cliff but a tank can't cross it). The only appealing thing I feel about space battles is the unconventional vibe of fighting somewhere other than land for a change, and also being able to up the unit count to epic proportions due to the vast open space (which btw SupCom can also do, albeit still on land) _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
a mmo in a RTS, you know that might work for first person shooters, but every time i get bored look its sounds like a short term bullsh*t game other than the awesome graphic's it has no substance to it, its like a 5 month, made game too short, no thought and full of OTT .
How dare you compere that to WiC, this looks like total rubbish, even supreme commander is better than this sh*t.
ive played co'op games like Qauke 1,2,3 and WoW they where good, but those games go dry after a while, After playing them i never want buy another MMO, EVER. _________________ Link to a document to see what mods i have and/or working on or working with
Click QUICK_EDIT
How dare you compere that to WiC, this looks like total rubbish, even supreme commander is better than this sh*t.
Supreme Commander itself was rather shit. It's just a typical RTS with a hideously inflated unit count that it tries to pass off as something groundbreaking and revolutionary. That's like saying Borderlands is a milestone in RTS history because of its sheer weapon permutations.
WiC is boring after a while. You'd get the same feeling when playing C&C 4.
EoN is just SupCom but instead of an inflated unit count, it's an inflated player count.
Dubzac wrote:
every time i get bored
...which is something that will happen inevitably no matter what game you play.
If you can play the same game for ages and ages and not get bored, that's called a gaming addiction. _________________
The white lady~! QUICK_EDIT
Joined: 25 Sep 2006 Location: Teamblackistan Posts: Over 9000
Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:48 pm Post subject:
Quote:
If you can play the same game for ages and ages and not get bored, that's called a gaming addiction.
Well, you could say the same about people who are always desperate to get all the newest games on the shelf because they're bored of the ones they just bought..
I'd say, if you can play a single game for that long, it's called "game satisfaction" _________________ The Fall of Hammerfest - Epic Tiberian chain story
Tiberian Odyssey mapping department. Discord The Team Black Index QUICK_EDIT
Also Known As: evanb90 Joined: 20 Feb 2005 Location: o kawaii koto
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:01 am Post subject:
You know, I found and still find WiC extremely entertaining, especially the singleplayer component. While in CNC I'll accomplish the mission the same exact way 100 of 100 times (HURR 50 OF THE SAME TYPE OF TANK), there is nearly an infinite number of ways to pursue victory in WiC.
Also happens to the be the reason why I enjoy Quake 1 single-player more than any modern FPS's singleplayer. _________________ YR modder/artist, DOOM mapper, aka evanb90
Project Lead Developer, New-Star Strike (2014-)
Former Project Lead DeveloperStar Strike (2005-2012), Z-Mod (2006-2007), RA1.5 (2008-2013), The Cold War (2006-2007) QUICK_EDIT
ive played co'op games like Qauke 1,2,3 and WoW they where good, but those games go dry after a while, After playing them i never want buy another MMO, EVER.
I'm gonna take this as a point to notice you have very little to respect for a video game taste. QUICK_EDIT
You can 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
New C&C game!
