Points I think VG should take to heart

[Hardin7]

Okay. Just to give a brief introduction about myself. I've been playing command and conquer since 1995. I've played virtually every command and conquer game ever released and enjoyed the overall franchise as a whole. There were only a few disappointments (C&C4, Generals: Zero Hour) in my opinion, but I do really enjoy the C&C universe. Now I ‘am creating this thread just to show what I think what would make the new game better. All I can do is try to make something happen and it’s up to you guys if you’ll take the time to acknowledge. So without further ado, here it goes(If you guys see incorrect grammer, I’am sorry about that, I was just going along with this very quickly)

1. Please do away with the sub factions stuff like in previous command and conquer games. Generals Zero hour had this stuff and it makes the game extremely unbalanced. Everyone knew that the USA Super weapons generals was over powered because of the alpha aura bombers. Then you started seeing games that said “No super weapons general” and stuff like that. That is already a bad sign.

2. I am currently a SC2 player, and the game is overall pretty good, the way it plays, its online community and all that. Victory Games should take the time to look at their online environment. They have matchmaking, creating parties, custom games the community created. Please do not overlook this, this is very important to have in the new Command and conquer game. We need a system that will match us accordingly with an equally skilled player, not the way it was done before in other command and conquer games. In my opinion, that’s what makes a game really fun, playing with someone who is in the same skill bracket as you.

3. This is a small feature but its good, please include an option where it lets you run the game in window borderless mode. SC2 has it and all these newer games have it, please don’t forget this one.

4. Make sure you guys have an option and in the menu of the game somewhere where you can have health bars. In command and conquer red alert 3, you had to press Shift+Spacebar every game get health bars. This was really annoying.

5. **Important** This is is probably the most important. Every command and conquer game I played had a pier to pier connection when you play online. The only command and conquer I know that didn’t have this was command and conquer 4. And because of that, it ran really smooth and the gameplay speed was consistent. Please include this, in the year 2011. This is a necessity. All I’am saying in a nutshell is if another person has a slow computer in the same game I’am in, I shouldn’t get punished with also by having the whole game slowdown. (SC2 Slipped on this one) To get a perfect example of what I’am talking about, play League of Legends, Or Heroes Of Newerth. Those game online plays is super smooth and no matter how much action is going on the screen the game doesn’t slow down, just your fps but not the game play. Or look at counter strike, if I had a slow computer in that game, is anyone else affected?

6. Make the game semi fast paced. Red alert 3 was a little too slow for me. I believe the community rated Red Alert 2 as their favorite game correct? So I believe the game needs to retain that faced paced action the red alert 2 had. Something around StarCraft 2. This is important to me as well.

7. Lastly, Please support your game in the long run. Take your time with this game and you guys should have SC2 in your radar. Competition is good and StarCraft is your competitor in the RTS department. I believe you guys have what it takes to make a better game just take your time with it. Delay it till 2014, who cares. The end result will be a much better product. I know you guys probably can’t delay it that much because of EA or whatever but just try to take your time with it as much as you can. I believe sc2 took like around 8-10 years to make or something krazy, imagine if you guys had the same time as well? It would be a masterpiece. You don’t need the same time as blizzard did with their game but I would say around 3 year development time would be good. Starcraft 1 still receives updates I believe and that game was created in 1996-7. When this game comes out. There better be updates in 4 years from when it comes out. Continuous support from Victory games.

I didn’t really hit on what the units should be like, what the game setting should be or whatever. I know you’ll guys will do a good job there. What I hit on was the foundation of what this game needs. I did this thread just for you guys and everyone else to discuss about. I’ll update it later on when I think of more things I think that would help. But its good the some command and conquer fans out there are still active with the forums looking for info on the new game. That’s good. All right guys, I’ll see ya. This thread is huge. Lol

V/R
Hardin

[Stammer6-2]

1. More factions are undoubtably harder to balance, but if you can do it then your game is going to have a ton more variety. Just look at the original Dawn of War: WH40k game. With expansions it had seven factions, and they were mostly all capable of beating one another as long as you were skilled at the game. Don't get me wrong though... if they're not going to put in the effort to ensure every faction is balanced, then I'd rather not see more (or fewer) than three.

2. I've really only ever gone online with Red Alert 3 before, but that game has the ability to match you with someone of similar skill. Honestly, I win about 50% of my matches, and that's a perfect number if you ask me. They're also very supportive of their modding and map-making community. Though in their upcoming games, I hope that Victory Games makes modding and map-making as easy as in StarCraft and StarCraft II. The Generals Worldbuilder (carried through to CNC3, RA3, and TT) is pretty terrible.

3. I don't have a problem with this.

4. Not only annoying, but it wasn't really ever pointed out to you. I'd like to see this as something you can pick in the Options menu and have it automatically start every match with it on.

5. That'd be nice. I lost a match in Red Alert 3 once because my opponent's game was making mine chug along so slowly that I couldn't react to anything.

6. It's not so much game pace, but the amount of strategy going into things. Where most RTS games seem to be more about which player can mass the most amount of tanks and steamroll their opponent first, Red Alert 3 to me seemed like a game where every decision counted. It was all about guerrilla warfare. Every individual unit mattered, not just whole masses of units.

7. StarCraft II didn't really take that long to make. It was only about 2-3 years (a normal development cycle for a game). But I do totally agree with you. The game shouldn't be released until it's damn well ready. And even when it's out, keep coming back to it and adding patches and stuff. Even if your games are fairly balanced, there are always some things that need fixing. Not only does that keep the games fair, but sometimes even the tiniest change can make a huge impact on player strategy, so it keeps the game fresh and interesting.

[AdmiralQ]

I agrre except for the faction thing. And I want to point out. NO NEED ONLINE TO INSTALL AND PLAY!

[Adridos]

Point 8:
VG must be aware of the fact that the aren't making SC 2 clone. It's C&C, not Starcraft. You say them to develop something similiar to SC 2, but if I want to play SC 2, then I go and play it, I don't need a game named C&C, but failing to deliver C&C feeling. I like that you want to help them make the game better, but copying someone else won't help them [originally Blizzard copyied us (Warcraft is a copy of Dune 2), so doing the same to them isn't very polite]. In RTS world, there were 3 games you could play: C&C, AoE, or SC. If you wanted hard core gaming, you playied SC. If, on the other hand, you wanted to fight battles a lot more realistically (macro, not stupid clicking), you playied AoE and for everyone else, there was C&C. We have our history and we're proud of it. We are the ones to be proud of the best villian ever. We are the ones with always good factions with perfect story and exciting multiplayer. We have the best "easy to learn, hard to master" combination of the three RTS gods, not some stupid SC with elfs, drunks and tyranids, where you have to click every friction of second to get some income. I like SC, but copying it is stupid. Blizzards are the ones copying after all (factions - Warhammer, gameplay - us, toolbar - AoE - I'm not sure on this, etc.). Except of all the things with "like SC 2", I like your ideas.

[AdmiralQ]

the SC2 thing is I think is that it stayed true to SC1, that is what VG needs to do with C&C

[Adridos]

Oh, and a minor note for you Hardin7. Starcraft was made in 1998 [I know it sucks, because I was born on 97 and my brother on 98, so he can tell he was born along with "greatest RTS ever" (I dont think it was that good, but people say it )] and it latest patch was in 2001, so it isn't even half the time you described.

[hellodean]

1. i really like subfactions. it adds more variety for play, tho i do undersand your concern for balancing issues.

4. i dont know what your talking about with the "having to press Shift+Spacebar every game get health bars. " in red alert 3.. i never had to

5. as long as its not always online needed to play the missions or skirmish is my concern

6. i prefered the pace of kw to ra3, the harvesting system in ra3 i think messed up the flow of things.

[sgfan206]

WHAAAT??!?

No sub-factions?!?? Ya gotta be kiddin'!!!!

Sub-faction were the best thing in ZH!!!
Imagine Generals without generals ... no challenge, no comments, no ... nothing! That can't, that ... mustn't be!!!

[Hardin7]

All I'am really saying is you should copy some of SC2's good features. Like there matchmaking(with ladders and divisions), smooth gameplay, and their online formula with allowing of custom games. In no way I would be pleased if they started copying and making replicas of SC2 units and such. Usually when games that make it into the market copy some features of other games. (I.E. like forza copying in some areasgran turismo, battlefield copying call of duty, and super meat boy copying super mario to name a few) The fast and fluid smooth gameplay should be one of the things they needs to get right, because even the community voted Red Alert 2 there favorte C&C game, including me, and that game had really fast gameplay. It was so fun!.

Also I think sub factions are such a joke. It's because think about how hard it is to balance like 7-9 different factions, you know how hard that is going to be? Almost impossible with all of the different combinations of units. And Adridos, your right, that was my fault. SC1 latest patch was in 2001, but that is still pretty good considering that kept patching the game 4 years or so after launch. I dont think the command and conquer community ever witnessed that.

[=LEVIATHEN=]

While it may be true that the subfactions were unbalanced in Zero Hour, that doesn't make me want them any less. I LOVE having new units and new buildings, even if they are overpowered and/or unnecessary.
Besides, in things like the General's Challenge, that small imbalance can give you more of a challenge in many cases.
Now, when it comes to multiplayer, that is where it may be a problem (I've only ever played multiplayer in a C&C game with TT).
What could happen is this: have it so that the player on the other team has an advantage to balance out the advantage the other player has.
For instance: Infantry General vs. Airforce General. The infantry and base defenses can take the planes out easily, right? So, maybe the planes could cost less and take less time to build. And maybe they could hover in the air instead of being forced to land. This would only be activated when playing against a player who has an advantage against you, and you can choose to turn this on or off for yourself, but not for others.

But otherwise, you make a lot of good points and I agree with you.