Command & Conquer

If it isn't hard to learn then we should have a lot of 'average level' players around already, but sadly that is not the case. If a player thinks he can pick any units he want and blindly steamroll his way to win then he just made himself a nice paper target and a fodder. I doubt any rts game out there work that way.

Under my experience, CNC4 players ragequit because they already realized that they lost the fight. Simple as that.

CNC4 is not for the lighthearted where once you lose for one moment you give up, a.k.a. ragequit

Maybe it's the "No final death" thing, since you can respawn, people go "meh" and quit... IDK

Yeah ragequiters realized that they lost the fight and throw a rage. You will find ragequiters in every game and blame the person not the game.

If I go and play pubstomp alone, and notice I have 4 retards on my team (sit in spawn, no idea what tib is) then I usually quit and find another game. Because no point wasting time on an already lost match.

I would say more people quit before the end of a game in older games than C&C 4. Why it's not noticed as much in older games is that the game would end right there. It's more noticable in C&C 4 as the people left over still have to finish the match and the loss of that player quickly becomes apparent.

Though I agree on the teamwork thing. Doesn't matter how good you are individually; if your team sucks, even a stack of average players working together will steamroll you. In those situations, I wouldn't see any point in playing a clearly lost game.

Good points noodle, actually never thought of that. Now that I think about it I rarely ever got the pleasure to finish of my opponents last buildings, usually they quit already during the first harassing attack. So RA 3 and C&C 3 have ragequitters on basically 90 % of the games, but they are all 1vs1 so the game ends there.

On C&C 4, we have 10 players, so it's normal that at least 1 on each team stays (so the game continues). But quite normal that the rest quit when they notice it's a lost game.

I admit. Sometimes I would ragequit.

There's no disconnect menu in C&C4 so people don't know if their game crashed or if it was an intentional DC... but then again there isn't an official ladder so it doesn't really matter that much...

I quit sometimes. When you see the enemy work together, and your team splitted or camping, and the enemy just taking all the tib, what's the the point of keep playing? Sometimes it looks like your have a saboteur in your team, because the blue tib is there, and the just ignore it. Sad.

Cool, these other reasons are news to me.

Well, those points are important too, like the comparison to cc3, however, players to have less to manage less and feels less of a connection with his forces.

In C&C4, comebacks are just really hard to do, especially if your low on tib, and the enemy is doing a good job of denying it from you, either because ur team sux, or their team is better.

The counter system tries to help, but does not change it too much.

The System is flawed as i see it, it promotes camping at TCNs and at tib sites, it has a relatively low skill curve causes people to find the game boring if they don't jump to coordinated team play.

Not to mention the technical issues.

But I see the entire system as promoting quiters. In a RTS people quit less because they feel they have accomplished something substantial, be it building a base, having the luxury of an economy, and in short, something they can point to in a replay, and go, no one else saw it coming, or look at that army of and I got them heroic through killing ****,

Now in c&C4 we get none of that feeling, Veterancy is checked by the mechanics, a Heroic Hunter can't even take out 2 avengers.

Veterancy is just a crate u pick up, u no longer earn it, no accomplishment.

Furthermore you can just pump out a unit to replace one that just died, no prob, sure u lose time, but who is really counting?

Tiberium comes down at regular intervals and doesn't harm anything, sure u can detonate it, but that is more something to just anoy players.
Tiberium is no longer what it was, not a threat at all, never was in C&C4, we don't see any Tiberium damage or crisis except in intro, and that is in the distant past, just as how it is now.

All this makes the player feel the game is not worth their time nor money.

The entire C&C4 experience has single handendlly Undermined the foundation of C&C of RTS, and that is why C&C died with the rise of C&C4, an why people don't have any obligation to stay in a game.

Please, dont use "C&C died", it sounds too repetitive, every franchise has its low points, but they can always come back with enough effort and intelligence put.

Back on topic, C&C4 took a heavy risk in forcing players play as a team to win, I think the original idea was to promote the formation of clans and online gameplay so more people will get their buddies to play the game, unfortunately it didnt go well, it's a similar to FPS with a small but terrible problem, in a FPS you can still have a positive kill ratio even if your team is a major failure, I manage positive kill ratios most of the time in Black Ops even if my team is not always really good, in C&C4 you dont have that satisfaction, which is a major psychological annoyance, this flaw is, I think, one of the reasons why C&C4 online experience was disliked by so many potential FPS gamers.

That's the way I see it.

I was in the beta, and, not knowing what I was doing, assaulted a TCN hub where a Nod Defense was camped. I called for support, and nobody moved a finger to help me.

I wanted to quit.

I didn't do it, because I don't like to quit, but I wanted to. Perhaps that element is contributing to it.

Unfortunately, C&C 4 is like an RTS version of Battlefield.