Command and Conquer 3

Almost like our discussion in that squad topic [more of a verbal batttle really]

ok, all agreed, im just a lil confused as to were this is contradicting any of my comments, yes the cnc3 UI colapses in sections, and thats good


it wud be best if u ignoor some of my older posts, and just read the "over and over and over and over and over" part

all my opinions and comments based on them are comparing cnc3 to CCG, its technical preqel

i will not "give it a rest" as my opinions are valid and backed up with evidence, and are certainly not breakin any forum rules

looking at my staff badge and making the assumption my aim is to just flame cnc3, is rather stupid, iv been playing cnc for years, iv been supcom admin for a month or so

i could easily just leave u people to it, but the game isnt gona get any better or worse, due to what i say, so thes realy no need

it dusnt matter what my staff position is, i do not have to adjust my opinions to suit u, so i wud advise "giving it a rest"


wel just call this lil argument over, and get back ontopic, its getting very tedious me repeating myself over and over to every last person that moans or jumps to conclusions

This post has been edited by Shalashaska: Sep 11 2006, 23:41 PM

I know this is off topic, but it seems that the dates are messed up. It says september 12 instead of september 11. Is it just me or is it for other people?

its the 12th of september for me, its 00:50 in britain

anyway, back on topic

Why isnt someone allowed to post their concerns about a game. CNC3 has so much potential to be a great RTS but after seeing all the latest updates I believe EA will deliver a dissapoining product. As a person who has grown up playing games from the CNC franchise its nice to have seen them evolve over time but so far I regard CNC3 as a step backwards rather than forwards.

We have like, 4 or 5 months before the friggen demo is released. Another month or 2 for the actual game. What we see now is going to be very different from the final product. And how could it be a step backwards? In MP maybe, but not in SP or any other thing that made the CNC franchise awesome.

I agree with PTP, we have some time before the game is actually released, bare in mind people that the video was a "showcase demo" not supposed to be regarded as the final product, I have high hopes for this game and i too grew up playing Command and Conquer, i think i was about 6 or so when i play TD for the first time and i was hooked since then

well if the multiplayer is shit then there is no need for this site to support it.

very good point, constructive criticism is required

Yes, that is true. I am pretty sure GRs will be incharge of battletesting for it though.

It's not going to be THAT different. It's not like they're going to completely remove core gameplay elements. Unfortunately I think the problems with C&C 3 will go beyond minor tweakable things such as damage and speed of units. C&C 3 might end up being shallower than CCG/ZH at a fundamental level. That would be tragic.

and thats my biggest fear AGM, I know the single player in generals was pretty crap but its saving grace was the multiplayer and im really afraid that CNC3 will fail to deliver a great multiplayer experience. Sure the single player might be good but Warcraft and Dawn of War as well as having excellent campaign modes had very good multiplayer to increase the longevity of the game. Something that a company that knows how to satisfy their fans properly know what to do.

If blizzard can do that , e.a can ...

thers my point entirely (but seen as its my point, it rly dusnt matter, im just here to flame )



what we see is not going to be very different, core gameplay elements arnt just put in and taken out and switched around, they were decided at the begining of development, and ther here to stay

and this is GR, not the official forums or sum random cnc fansite, singleplayer means nuthing here, the game is judged on its MP and MP alone, if it isnt up to scratch, teh most awsome storyline and characters in the world r not gona save it



exactly

This post has been edited by Shalashaska: Sep 12 2006, 07:53 AM

On and on we go.

I don't think this game will come out anywhere near balanced or bug free. If the game is not supported early on it will lose alot of the more competitive players .... I doubt they will go to SupCom tho

no they wont, therl go back to CCG


only those who have allready considered supcom or are planing to get both will go to it when cnc3 fails




This post has been edited by Shalashaska: Sep 12 2006, 17:35 PM

c&c3 will be competitive mp. i hope.

Guys,

Let me be blunt in saying, you guys are being near ridiculous in your assumptions, and no offense or disrespect to anyone and their opinions, but let me say again, just because the single player experience is being treated as our #1 focal point of the game, does not mean for a single mili-second that multiplayer is going to get any less focus.

It simply means, we recognize the single player in Generals and BFME 1&2 was not up to par with expectations, and especially for a C&C game where story is paramount, we realize that we need to make a kick-ass single player campaign with a very compelling story. Ladies and gentlemen, I know you guys are hardcore multiplayer, but Starcraft, Wacraft, Age of Empires, C&C - classics of the genre, would not have been nearly as successful at their release if not for a good single player experience to capture the hearts of many gamers. Sure you can argue that the multiplayer kept the life of the game going...and good post support, but single player (proven by research) is what drives a huge chunk of the RTS audience initially. You don't tell your friends to see a movie because the visual effects were cool and your seat was comfortable, you tell them because it had an awesome story and kept you entertained. Unless we're talking about an MMO or game that is built specifically for multiplayer (like Counterstrike, Team Fortress, etc), then single player must be considered as a paramount feature for the game to appeal across all audiences.

2/3 of the people who will buy Command & Conquer 3 will play the single player experience FIRST. That means, if we want to get them into multiplayer, they need to enjoy the single player because that is what they will experience first, thats what they care about the most, a damn good story and compelling gameplay experience.

Its obvious this site thrives on the success of multiplayer from Generals, ZH, and BFME 1 & 2. Its obvious that you guys care about multiplayer miles beyond single player. We totally respect and understand that. APOC has delivered that message many times, and now I am continuing that.

We're not blind ) We get that about multiplayer, trust me, we get that, and our entire development team reads these forums A LOT.

The fact is, we've proven to you and the critics that we can make a very compelling multiplayer experience, and we will take those same efforts, same key gameplay core elements and concepts of fast, fluid, and fun high intensity play that this team is known for, and apply that to C&C 3....and then some, and then some more. And, we'll keep pressing heard to iron out all the bugs, nobody is perfect.

We're not going to walk backwards with multiplayer for C&C 3, or post launch support, we're going to continue taking the biggest strides possible. In fact, we aim to revolutionize the genre into a professional sport like never before, in a way that casual and hardcore gamers alike can gravitate to. If you've read our features page on the official site, you'll notice a bullet point, it reads exactly this:

RTS as a Sport
Observe, broadcast, and compete in thrilling online battles with innovations including all-new interactive spectator modes, VoIP communication, player commentary, and more.

To all of you, that should excite you, especially for a site that thrives upon replays and shoutcasts, now we're making it even more interactive and fun to view matches, learn strats, pull more people into multiplayer, and ultimately, make C&C 3 a huge spectator sport. That bodes very well for you guys as multiplayer addicts. Just sit back and think about the possibilities for a moment, we certainly are. We'll be talking about this feature in much more depth further down the road, for now, thats just a taste.

So with that said, the same effort and passion put into multiplayer from our past RTS Games, and then multiply that by at least 2X, if not 4X, is being put into Command & Conquer 3.

That which you have seen in the gameplay videos is not representative by any means of the balance and speed at which the final game will play.

Its an inaccurate assumption to assume that we've finished balancing, the units will move that fast, etc etc. We have a LONG ways to go, a lot of community input to receive from you and internal balance testers, multiple community summits, a demo, and weekly feedback from you guys on the message boards, before this game wraps up for release....and then of course there is always patches, but we'll make sure we get it as close to right as possible right out of the box.

Hopefully that reassures you, its frustrating to see these types of threads pop up when we've countered them many times with messages like the above.

I sit next to the multiplayer guys FYI, and in the short time i've been sitting here, its evident they want to ensure the multiplayer kicks major butt.

Multiplayer is a huge focal point of the game, and its getting as much focus and treatment as you would expect and hope for, and then some.

I would defintiely say, our idea of 'RTS as a Sport' broadcast feature will not work if there isn't a good multiplayer experience to accompany it...so that should tell you something as well :-)

-Predator

p.s. - in all fairness, you guys have a point when you see a gameplay video and assume from that, but, those initial videos are a visual representation, not an exact account of how fast or balanced the game is/will be. Its already evident you guys think everything is moving too quick, and we are already assessing that a lot.



GDI Forever

We will find APOC

Very, very good to hear Predator!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

exactly, but from our perspective your metaphor is the wrong way round, single player is the comfortable seats, and teh special effects, multiplayer is the entertainment, the movie, the reason we recomend a game



this game uses the MCV does it not? it has instant capture/build/sell , it has walls and engineres and limited build radiuses?


if so, then i cant agree


what we want is not nessaserily "fun, interesting, exiting" multiplayer experience in your definitions of it, what GR wants is a quality competative grade multiplayer, not just a feature filled fun flashy experience



u mean here at GR? because u wont find us on the official forums, its in a terrible state, in severe need of moderators


otherwise great post EA P spectator features is a definet plus

This post has been edited by Shalashaska: Sep 12 2006, 19:24 PM