Blog FeedDon’t Mess with My Tiberium
I wanted to wait for the official announcement before saying anything, and here it is. Command And Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars has been announced by EA, and already everyone is torn in two. Many are thrilled that the owners of the franchise are finally returning to the original storyline that made it such a hit. Many are also worrying their pants off, after being so woefully unhappy with CnC Generals, not to mention everything else EA has ever had a major hand in as well. So, how does one find balance in this sticky, gloomy but nevertheless exciting situation?
I of course have my own barrel full of skepticism. The game will apparently use an upgraded version of the “Sage” game engine which was used in Generals. This troubles me because I am of the firm belief that the engine in question is craptacular. Since getting the game, I have upgraded my computer to levels which, while mid-range now, are far beyond the high-end of PC hardware at the time of Generals development. And yet, with more than a couple of AI opponents, the game still runs woefully. I’ve also seen it drag on systems with specs better than my own, for a reason I was never able to determine. If all my other, much newer and prettier games run so much smoother, then something is up with the code.
Next up is support. When the game was first released, it was riddled with issues - once again, a game in a non-release state being rushed out early. This isn’t exactly unheard of. Afterwards, CnC Generals received a couple of patches, and then EA essentially pulled the plug. It was announced that no further code tweaking for the game would be forthcoming, and since then, only one small patch was released to being the game in to line with the release of the CnC: First Decade set. Surely a franchise as beloved as Command & Conquer deserves better than this.
I suppose my last issue is probably going to be a slightly more controversial one - and that is the gaming experiences themselves in the previous few CnC games. I nearly exploded with excitement all those years ago after I finally got my hands on Tiberian Sun. Alas, I now think the game itself was pretty poor. Brilliant storytelling, fantastic atmosphere and interface, but the gameplay itself was slow and boring for me. Red Alert 2 on the other hand did much the opposite. The gameplay was much faster, far less bugs, and exciting enough for me to buy the expansion pack. The story however is something I thought was a bit weak, and while the jokes were amusing in RA2, the sheer silliness really did get a bit out of hand come Yuri’s Revenge. By this time the name “Westwood” didn’t exist anymore. Meanwhile, Generals took storytelling to new lows, by not having one. A logical progression, I suppose.
And so, this brings us to what EALA needs to do to keep me happy. They need to have a game engine which is both stable and efficient. They need to have support which lasts for longer than a few months after the expansion release. They need to continue with the excellent story and atmosphere in the previous two Tiberium games, but they need to do it while keeping the good pace of gameplay which was present in RA2 and Generals. All that said, it seems like a pretty big ask, given the track record. But for some wacky reason in my head, I think they may pull it off.
I think that the last few CnC games have been a bit of a learning experience. The developers now know from Tiberian Sun that you can’t have a game with just a good story - you need gameplay. They know from Red Alert 2 that if you have good gameplay, you need a good story, not just something to point and laugh at. And they know from Generals that deviating too hard from the classic CnC formula, and having a bunch of monkeys writing the code doesn’t do well for your reputation. While I still have a gut feeling that we’ll end up with an unpolished release that requires some patching, I can’t imagine EALA will allow themselves to really screw this one up. I mean, come on. It’s CnC 3.
21st April | Reply
I couldn’t disagree more with your cautious optimism.
First off, what team is going to be developing CnC3? Will it be filled by former Westwood producers/developers/coders or will it be done by stock EA game drones? I’m not trying to knock the hard-workers at EA, but they do have some well-documented problems with game development.
Second, Tiberian Sun was a huge let-down. I’m not kidding. I bet the Nod campaign and I’m pretty sure I played through most of the expansion campaign for Nod as well. Boring. I can’t remember anything that happened from that game. However, you ask me about my play-time with the original CnC and I can recall for you cutscenes, battle plans and my infamous “sand bag theory.” You know, the game glitch that let you snake sand bags into the enemy base and pop up thinks like Obelisks of Light right next to the GDI MCV.
Red Alert 2, like you said, had more ham than a pig farm, and that’s putting it mildly. Generals…blew chunks. I simply could not get into that game, nor its total unrelatedness to the CnC franchise proper.
Really, I don’t know about this one. I want to be excited, I do…but…I don’t know. I just don’t think it is possible for EA to revitalize this franchise and do it justice.
Also, if they don’t have the original Kane, they should just stop production right now.
21st April | Reply
I want to know why they even bother trying to put numbers on this franchise anymore. That’s what I want to know.
21st April | Reply
I’m looking back on the C&C series with mixed emotions. C&C was the first Real-Time Strategy game that I ever played and there was a lot of fun to be had there. On the other hand, I do remember getting incredibly annoyed with the game when, for example, my Commando would insist on getting himself blown up by his own demolition charges because he decided to crawl away… I missed out on C&C2 with the exception of a demo that I found to be incredibly pedestrian. However, Red Alert 2 was just fab. In difference to Chris, I didn’t have a problem with the story (all game plots tend to be pish and I wasn’t expecting Shakespeare) and the game just ran at a wonderful pace. In fact, Red Alert 2 was the last and, possibly, only RTS that I have really enjoyed. Warcraft 3 and Dawn of War are good games but I just don’t think they are as much fun…
As for C&C3? Well, I’m not too excited about this one as I’m expecting another plodding pace. If they can introduce the pace and fun-factor of Red Alert 2 then I’m interested but the past games set in the GDI/Nod Command & Conquer universe haven’t given me much cause for hope.
21st April | Reply
This just supports the view that developers and publishers in particular can’t (or won’t) find new IP to release. They end up re-animatting long dead corpses which should have been left to rot years ago…
Come on…it’s EA. They are only interested in the bottom line, revenue generating nature of this game and nothing more. Kids the world over will go “Cool…CnC3. I must buy it, cos it’s CnC!”.
Will it sell? Yes. Will it be any good? Possibly.
22nd April | Reply
In Reply to #4:
Not for nothing, but I’m pretty sure the GDI/NOD universe was originally supposed to be a trilogy. The first game was supposed to be subtitled “Tiberiab Dawn” the second “Tiberian Sun” and the last “Tiberian Twilight.”
So, I don’t really blame EA for milking this franchise. I just really, really hope it gets a deserving Swan Song.
23rd April | Reply
In Reply to #3:
See, i think that they realised how slow Tiberian Sun was, and that is why RA2 was so much faster - it is not just a general difference between the Tiberium games and the Red Alert games - as I recall, the original Red Alert was slow too. I think faster paced RTS games are where it’s going to stay, and RA2 + Generals shows that EA at least understands that now. So I think that’s what we’ll see in the next Tiberium installment.
I actually think that Generals gameplay was pretty solid, so a new step up from that (but with a story worth telling) and a better game engine will pretty much have me won over. Maybe my expectations are just lower than you guys?
23rd April | Reply
I’m just hoping the two sides will be quite varied.
I love CnC and Tiberian Sun, but they need to find some new gimmicks for CnC3. WC3 has the hero system (whether you like the system or not) and DoW has resource nodes and squad combat. CnC3 needs to make sure it can keep up with the other games in this aspect.
Now, I’ve never played Generals (which from reading posts seems to be a thankful thing) but from TS I know that once you get Goliaths (those the tanks/mechs, been ages) there is no point for infantry men. I want to be able to use all units throughout the game and get good performance out of them. It’s stuff like this CnC3 needs to make sure it’s updated on.
I don’t mean to ramble on much longer, but I just want to make sure CnC3 will not be stale even before it is released. Two sides to a conflict is not such a massive thing anymore, especially since in the next expansion DoW will have now SEVEN races. Don’t want to see CnC3 not able to live up to its past games.
10th May | Reply
Okay, I take it all back.
http://pc.ign.com/articles/705/705757p1.html
If EA can make due on the things they are talking about in this article, they have a winner on their hands and my money in their wallet.
Also, I love the ripple effect on the water the Orcas make in the screenshots.