Last edited by Reno; 05-31-2012 at 08:57 AM.
For the rest:
The games have different gameplay styles but they are still strategy games which deal with the same UI design issues, you can't just throw those examples away as "unadequate". "Succesful RTS of the same style" - Any titles?
Besides, who tells the infantry to get smaller? You could aswell make the tanks bigger with keeping the infantry the same size it is now. It already partially hapened in C&C4, where units were much bigger than they used to be in older C&Cs.
APCs in C&C do not work that way, because the infantry needs to be manual loaded/unloaded each time you need them to do so. Shooting from interior of vehicles limits the aim and firepower, and while in certain situations it is useful, APCs deploy infantry and support them, the infantry doesn't sit inside all the time and shoot from the very small shooting ports.
Special weapons like two barreled tanks: Yes, they are, but they could aswell look different, it is dependent not only on the fun factor, but also on the game's visual style. C&C General's didn't have a double barreled tank as a T3 unit for US and GLA. Is it then a badly designed game?
I think this is a great idea , MBT (imo) be T2 weapons. Then they should have brother of simular size but more expensive and advanced. better armo , more hp , more dmg ... somehitng like that. And yes i do agree that it would be great if tanks were up to scale.
Victory Games is Electronic Arts' dedicated Strategy Gaming studio. Formed in 2010 under the leadership of Jon Van Caneghem, Victory Games has offices in Los Angeles, CA; Austin, TX; and Shanghai, China and is currently focused on the Command & Conquer franchise.