Can we just get an upgrade to generals instead of al this dlc stuff?

woutva_legacy

Private
- Join Date: Aug 2011
- Posts: 12
Can we just get an upgrade to generals instead of al this dlc stuff?

#1

04-10-2012, 10:14 AM

I was wondering. It has been 10 years since C&C Generals was released. I loved this game, especialy with Zero Hour it was just so much fun. Sure it wasnt that balanced, sometimes situations came up that you couldnt really counter something as effective as another army, but overall it was pretty decent.

In fact, I notice very few differences from Starcraft 2 balance wise, I dont really feel that game is perfectly balanced as well, and to be honest, Generals felt more fair, and at least, more fun (even though I have a lot of fun with SCII)

Anyway, my point:

Just give us Generals again, with a graphic improvement (its been 10 years after all) some new maps, and some new units. I would be totaly fine with just, say, 4 new units for each faction and just support and graphic improvement. Add a new campaign to the mix and you'll have a happy buyer.

What I DONT want, is EA trying to chance a game that just worked the way it was. Can someone please explain to me why this game needs chance? Why on earth do we need DLC upgrades? Generals worked just fine.. And honestly, the last time they wanted to chance C&C, we got 4.. And yes. 4 is bad. No discussion.

Just give me the generals game I love, and dont chance things just to chance things. Starcraft 2 is as far as I know almost the same as 1 with a few chances. I am FINE with that. I dont want a second battleforge (+ points to you for knowing this game) where we have to pay for every minor tweak. I want a full game, and I want it to be generals worthy.
Tags: None
AgentOrange_legacy

Private
- Join Date: Mar 2011
- Posts: 204
#2

04-10-2012, 10:23 AM

Boring. Go play Generals then, it has a big modding community.
Comment
bombspy

Private
- Join Date: May 2011
- Posts: 345
#3

04-10-2012, 10:26 AM

You want to play Generals 1? So play Generals 1. There is no need to pay 50 bucks für new graphics.
Comment
Adridos

Private
- Join Date: Jul 2011
- Posts: 1217
#4

04-10-2012, 11:32 AM

Originally posted by woutva View Post

What I DONT want, is EA trying to change a game that just worked the way it was. Can someone please explain to me why this game needs change? Why on earth do we need DLC upgrades? Generals worked just fine.. And honestly, the last time they wanted to change C&C, we got 4.. And yes. 4 is bad. No discussion.

Why do we get DLC?

People on consoles can't make anything and so any minor new content is like "God sent" for them, so they pay ridiculous charges for minor stuff. Game companies noticed the idiocy and started exploiting it. And now EA wants to do teh same thing to us by not giving us any World Builder and charging us for a pack of colours into skirmish for about 5 $.

There are too few companies that accept they can't mess with PC community and rather give us standard we are used to, which in turn gives them great sales. Namely Valve, CD Projekt, Blizzard (sort of), etc.
Two of those don't even do DLCs and the third (CD Projekt) makes DLCs, but for free, as they should be (and not a new horse armour, but 4 hours of campaign).

You simply can't count on a developer to make the game without this sort of crap and make the game modder friendly, which boosts the sales at PC, but isn't done by exploiting week mind of some people.

Last edited by Stephanovich; 04-10-2012, 01:04 PM.
Comment
hellodean2

Private
- Join Date: Jul 2011
- Posts: 1257
#5

04-10-2012, 12:19 PM

i seem to remember a few months ago they said a world builder is (currently) too complicated for us to use, but it isnt yet decided what will happen.
and there is a year or so until its released so its still possible for it to come out. even if its not shipped with the game it could be added later.

as for the make it the same but new graphics, sorry to disappoint you but it wont happen. the new game is in development. your best bet is the modding community to extend it.
Comment
oompahspore

Private
- Join Date: Jan 2012
- Posts: 665
#6

04-10-2012, 01:44 PM

agree with original poster
Comment
CnC_Fin

Private
- Join Date: Feb 2011
- Posts: 1437
#7

04-10-2012, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by woutva View Post

And honestly, the last time they wanted to chance C&C, we got 4.. And yes. 4 is bad. No discussion.

Your opinion

Originally posted by woutva View Post

Just give me the generals game I love, and dont chance things just to chance things.

Why should they remake Generals if only one person wants it? Of course there are probably hundreads of people who want that too, but there are a lot more people who think Generals and Zero Hour were already great, and want Generals 2 now. If you want Generals recreated so badly... make your own game or search for mods.
Comment
Plrsvek_legacy

Private
- Join Date: May 2011
- Posts: 609
#8

04-10-2012, 03:59 PM

You know, thats what I hated about SC2, being just a HD upgrade to SC1. The game itself brought nothing new to the genre, it just refined an old game back to todays standards. The singleplayer was also a huge letdown imo

Your title seems to be a little misleading, it sounds more like you just want Generals 2 to be more updated instead of making DLC content. I agree they should try to atleast add some new maps, like SC2 does. For stuff like new units, new skin, new music thats more the work of DLC or an expansion.

What you want can also easily be made by modders. We don't have to bother Bioware Victory for it, let them make new games. Currently we are unable to work with Frostbite 2, which kinda sucks, but if they'll give us modding tools then I bet some modding team will try to update Generals 1 with it.
Comment
Existion

Private
- Join Date: Feb 2011
- Posts: 2148
#9

04-10-2012, 10:44 PM

I agree with the others: If you want to play the original Generals, then play the original Generals. While an update to the graphics is always nice, I don't want to be playing the exact same game again. I already bought Generals 1. I can always play that.

In case you haven't noticed, never changing the gameplay just gets plain boring (take a look at CoD- a fun campaign, but then a boring multiplayer. I'd just get one with a good campaign and stick with it). That's why almost every C&C game has had some minor difference in the gameplay; so that it isn't boring.
C&C 4 was only such poor quality partially because of the time EA gave the developers to make the game, and partially because they changed the game too much.

The point is, with a sequal, you don't want it to be exactly the same as the first, and you don't want it to be too different.
Comment
Commander32_legacy

Private
- Join Date: Feb 2011
- Posts: 4084
#10

04-10-2012, 10:48 PM

Originally posted by =LEVIATHEN= View Post

The point is, with a sequal, you don't want it to be exactly the same as the first, and you don't want it to be too different.

I approve!!!
Comment
fenixlives_legacy

Private
- Join Date: Dec 2011
- Posts: 13
#11

04-11-2012, 04:07 AM

hellodean

i seem to remember a few months ago they said a world builder is (currently) too complicated for us to use, but it isnt yet decided what will happen.
and there is a year or so until its released so its still possible for it to come out. even if its not shipped with the game it could be added later.

as for the make it the same but new graphics, sorry to disappoint you but it wont happen. the new game is in development. your best bet is the modding community to extend it.

I will go absolutely mental if they don't give us world builder.. what BS is that to say its too advanced for us to use??!? Its never stopped anyone from trying........
Comment
Harrrr_legacy

Private
- Join Date: Feb 2011
- Posts: 614
#12

04-11-2012, 04:28 AM

Originally posted by fenix View Post

I will go absolutely mental if they don't give us world builder.. what BS is that to say its too advanced for us to use??!? Its never stopped anyone from trying........

There's been no actual word on any level editor or lack there of. That was one of the reasons for BF3. Given the framework difference, it would require a heavily modified if not completely new level editor in addition to other features. Aside from the framework needed to support an RTS, an RTS level editor is entirely different than an FPS level editor, as one of the key features in FPS level creation is the need for new meshes, and those meshes would obviously need extensive set-up to support the micro-destruction of BF3 maps (an example of this is how B2K maps have "more" destruction than other...it's no engine gimmick, it's just that the assets were better rigged for destruction). In an RTS level editor, however, unique meshes aren't explicitly needed as RTS maps are entirely "prop-oriented". Just this one example illustrates that a RTS level editor is more feasible, and any reasons from BF3 should be taken with a grain of salt.

That doesn't mean that there aren't legit reasons if a level editor doesn't show up other than "OMG DLC BBQ", but at this stage Generals 2 should have a clean slate.

Last edited by Harrrr; 04-11-2012, 04:30 AM.
Comment
hellodean2

Private
- Join Date: Jul 2011
- Posts: 1257
#13

04-11-2012, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by Harrrr View Post

There's been no actual word on any level editor or lack there of. That was one of the reasons for BF3.

ah yes thats a good point, it was referring to the frostbite engine for bf3, and there was concern it might be the same for gen2.
but your right it should be alot easier for an rts. in a way half of a strategy game is "designing/building" the map. sort of.
Comment
iRfades----

Private
- Join Date: Feb 2011
- Posts: 1302
#14

04-12-2012, 08:18 AM

if this dlc stuff comes at the expense of modding/wb tools itd greatly reduce my chances of buying this game.
dlc as an excuse for not having custom user-made content is just sickening to me.

the thought of them adding factions/units etc through dlc is also not very reassuring to me - if they arent going to take the multiplayer+balance seriously that seals it for me - i wont be bothering

so far (from what we've been shown/told about the game) im honestly not convinced of their ability to deliver a good gens2 thatd be worth my money/time
----
really hope they can prove me wrong though...

Last edited by iRfades----; 04-12-2012, 08:21 AM.
Comment
Existion

Private
- Join Date: Feb 2011
- Posts: 2148
#15

04-12-2012, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by CrazyGDIfan123` View Post

if this dlc stuff comes at the expense of modding/wb tools itd greatly reduce my chances of buying this game.
dlc as an excuse for not having custom user-made content is just sickening to me.

the thought of them adding factions/units etc through dlc is also not very reassuring to me - if they arent going to take the multiplayer+balance seriously that seals it for me - i wont be bothering

so far (from what we've been shown/told about the game) im honestly not convinced of their ability to deliver a good gens2 thatd be worth my money/time
----
really hope they can prove me wrong though...

RED: Oh, I doubt that that will happen. It might just take a while for a worldbuilder for this new engine to come out. I do not want to see anybody freaking out about not having the worldbuilder a few months after the game is released (Not saying that you will, of course).

GREEN: When it comes to adding factions and units, I think that that will be singleplayer-exclusive.

YELLOW: So far I've seen quite the opposite. I am very much anticipating this game.

Last edited by Existion; 04-12-2012, 09:18 PM.
Comment

Command & Conquer

Can we just get an upgrade to generals instead of al this dlc stuff?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment