Heron
Major

Your welcome

I like both tbh!

Very sweet siggy Heron

So RA3's cartoonish design came up as a topic recently. I find it very interesting to note such wildly different views for this. As the saying goes, one man's meat is another man's poison.

I personally want to see more realism in C&C, more serious war stories to come out. But hey, humor is a part of war, no matter how we spin it, and that's the way to go, in between humor and seriousness.

I was glad CIRE came out today to say a few words. Like for the realism thread (thread's interesting if you can get pass the bickering I am a part of, unfortunately), where he clearly stated his view on how the next C&C should be. And for the mod SDK for C&C4 (sadly not gonna happen). He cares, despite how some may choose to portray him in a different light.

I do look forward to the future. Because we have strong community members willing to bring forward the franchise despite a distinct lack of new stuff. I believe there's still room for this old dog to learn a few new tricks.

So the fight continues. I guess until the announcement of the new game comes, there will always be the battle between the purist faction that believes C&C4 to be a mistake, and the C&C4 believers who believes the change was a good thing that happened to C&C4.

It's a pity, really.

I have been thinking about how VG can potentially screw C&C up...it's not that I have no confidence in them, but EALA started promisingly, and they made T_T.

And all I can come up with, is a hellscape of Pink Pony Wars.

I'm looking into creating a blogspot for articles I will be doing over the summer about the C&C lore, and some ideas I had with the game itself. It will be long, but I hope to be able to do it right after my exams.

Act of War. Perhaps the most underrated RTS of all time. It had everything Generals players love: 3 factions of differing but equal strength, different playstyles, modern warfare. It had more, micromanaging units, combined arms tactics, infantry firefights.

It's a shame that people lost interest in the game, or perhaps Atari pulled the plug on Eugen Systems making a proper sequel to AoW. That said, many concepts in AoW can be efficiently used by the devs at VG to make a new C&C, not just limited to Generals. The game, if not for its many bugs with modern OS, might really be a game that can stand the test of time. Perhaps more.

Enough has been spoken about the MCV system vs the worker system. I put my faith in VG.

Today's short post is about C&C3's design problems, as I recently felt that it boiled down to the 11 month development time which caused C&C3 to tank, as in those days, they took some major decisions about the game that went horribly wrong. Case in point, the decision to have short matches of 10-15 minutes. On paper it sounded good, but it turned out to limit tactical and strategic depth as only a few viable strategies were involved as they were the most efficient for their cost.

C&C3 is supposed to be all about the return of the king of RTS and many now associate the failure of C&C3 to capture a lasting audience to be down to the MCV system. Bollocks. The MCV system is but a convenient excuse to people who didn't, or chose not to see, the problems that laid with C&C3. No, C&C3 failed for a variety of reasons. But it has nothing to do with the MCV. At all.