Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Command and Conquer 4 - Dissappointing.Follow

#1 Apr 04 2010 at 2:05 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
I preface this with the usual game oppinions expressed by the individual do not necessarily represent the views of the allakhazam staff, blah blah blah.

I have been a command and conquer fan for the entire history of the series. I actually bought renegades. I cried when Westwood got bought by EA. I consider the origional Red Alert to be the best strategy game ever. Period.

And, I unfortunatly hate Command And Conquer 4.

I wanted to like it, I really, really did. 3 Had issues, heck, red alert 3 had issues, but they were playable and close to what I was expecting. I even enjoyed the generals series once I got used to it, though it was always and remains buggy as hell. But what they did is to literally rip the heart and soul out of the game and replace it with that of the warhammer Dawn of War series, which I did not particularily enjoy, except with all the innovative features removed.

let us list exactly what is wrong with the game:
1. Buggy as hell. Under windows 7, you will likely experiance multiple crashes due to the embedded DRM ****. For example, under 64 bit, the initial game launcher will likely crash on you before you can enter the game, unless you quickly press the enter key. And when i say "you" I mean anyone attempting to play the present game on windows 7 64 bit. Sure, some people aren't crashing, but most of them are and it is really annoying.

2. The missions in campaign couldn't possibly be more depressing if they tried. You start with the world semi-ok, and you apperently just recovering from a war. You apperently have an irritating wife, who gets killed on mission 3 regardless of what you do. This serves no real point except to further a minor plot point. Namely that regardless of what GDI path you pick, you are apperently working for a douchebag. The guy that does Kane is usually pretty good. This time he was, not... Baically at every turn, your reward for doing a good job is a poorly acted (even by command and conquer's standards) depressing cutscene. Lucky for you there are only 7 per side, as opposed to the previous games 20 or so.

3. I play command and conquer because I want to build a cool base, build a ******** of tanks, and **** off other people by destroying their resource collectors. In c&c4, I can build cool tanks OR I can build a cool base. I dont get to build both. And resource collection? You basically get a set points pool that says how many units you can have. Ever. you can't increase it in game. you can't say "you know what? this time I want 5 billion tanks on both sides, that would be fun, and my computer can handle it. Crank that **** up!" And harvesting basically only serves to unlock pieces of your tech tree. Which you cannot automate via making a "harvester". Nooo... you have to micromanage collect and deliver each and every time. Which you have to do on average of 30 times per game.

4. Of course, even if you do collect the harvest thingies, Unless you have already played the game through several times to completion, you don't get to access most of your base equipmnet. becuase its locked out, and tied to your account so you can't even cheat code it or anythign just to play with the new toys. Want to build a mammoth tank in the campaign? You can't!

Arrgh. Just argh.

____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#2 Apr 04 2010 at 5:01 AM Rating: Good
The DRM already made it a done deal for me, not gonna play an OFFLINE GAME in a model where you have to be online to use it. I should be able to put that **** on a laptop and play it wherever I want without having to tether my cellphone.

The bits about base management don't surprise me one bit especially after their 'reassurances' that the things we were crying about losing really weren't a big deal and there was other cool **** to take its place; they were acting completely on the defensive with how they said it all and yet still remained totally vague about it.

Just bad form. Really sad to see such a great series go out with such a whimper. RA3 at least went out with a 1980s-style absurd sort of "bang".
#3 Apr 05 2010 at 12:21 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
21,027 posts
I never cared much for the combat style of Command and conquer. I liked the setting, and I found many of the unit concepts to be cool, but the whole requirement of building my base next to my existing base and infantry which seemed to take forever to kill each other didn't wow me. It probably didn't help that I'm terrible at RTS games.
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
I play command and conquer because I want to build a cool base, build a sh*tload of tanks... "you know what? this time I want 5 billion tanks on both sides, that would be fun, and my computer can handle it. Crank that sh*t up!"

Sounds like you might wan tot give Supreme commander a try if you haven't already; Supreme Commander 2 should be/is out soon. A friend of mine who is big into RTS games enjoyed it a lot.
#4 Apr 05 2010 at 2:33 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
3. I play command and conquer because I want to build a cool base, build a sh*tload of tanks, and **** off other people by destroying their resource collectors. In c&c4, I can build cool tanks OR I can build a cool base. I dont get to build both. And resource collection? You basically get a set points pool that says how many units you can have. Ever. you can't increase it in game. you can't say "you know what? this time I want 5 billion tanks on both sides, that would be fun, and my computer can handle it. Crank that sh*t up!" And harvesting basically only serves to unlock pieces of your tech tree. Which you cannot automate via making a "harvester". Nooo... you have to micromanage collect and deliver each and every time. Which you have to do on average of 30 times per game.

4. Of course, even if you do collect the harvest thingies, Unless you have already played the game through several times to completion, you don't get to access most of your base equipmnet. becuase its locked out, and tied to your account so you can't even cheat code it or anythign just to play with the new toys. Want to build a mammoth tank in the campaign? You can't!

This saddens me.
#5 Apr 05 2010 at 8:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
Allegory wrote:
I never cared much for the combat style of Command and conquer. I liked the setting, and I found many of the unit concepts to be cool, but the whole requirement of building my base next to my existing base and infantry which seemed to take forever to kill each other didn't wow me. It probably didn't help that I'm terrible at RTS games.
Dread Lörd Kaolian wrote:
I play command and conquer because I want to build a cool base, build a sh*tload of tanks... "you know what? this time I want 5 billion tanks on both sides, that would be fun, and my computer can handle it. Crank that sh*t up!"

Sounds like you might wan tot give Supreme commander a try if you haven't already; Supreme Commander 2 should be/is out soon. A friend of mine who is big into RTS games enjoyed it a lot.


I've played Supreme commander and it's expansion, but not 2 yet. They were fun, and I enjoyed them. Command and conquer always had this nostalgia for me I guess.
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#6 Apr 05 2010 at 8:22 AM Rating: Good
Terrorfiend
*****
12,905 posts
Supreme Commander just didnt do it for me. I loved Total Anihilation back in the day, so i assumed SupCom would be great. MEH.

I played the C&C franchise up through Generals and from time to time I will catch myself saying, "Time vill tell... Sooner or later, time vill tell.' lol

Some decent under the radar RTS games that I enjoyed are the Earth series (2150 and 2160). Both went directly to the bargain bin upon release. I liked the way you could design your units and the factions were fairly diverse.

Edited, Apr 5th 2010 7:24am by KTurner
#7 Apr 05 2010 at 8:47 AM Rating: Good
@#%^
*****
15,953 posts
I played (and loved) all C&C games until Red Alert 3. Despite the familiar actors, the story just didn't grab me and I found myself grinding to get through the missions.
____________________________
"I have lost my way
But I hear a tale
About a heaven in Alberta
Where they've got all hell for a basement"

#8 Apr 05 2010 at 4:37 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,443 posts
I'm an avid C&C fan myself and I basically had the game in my hand and my credit card in the machine when I decided to read the back cover of the box.

Yeah, no. Just no. The core of C&C has ALWAYS been that you get to build a base and do whatever you want from there. Don't take that away from me. And now being unable to play another offline game because of the constant online DRM thing, I refuse to buy another game with a similar DRM.

Apparently the router here (in the building) doesn't allow the DRM thing, regardless of what I do, so I'm sitting on a single player game I can't play because it can't connect. Just shoot me. Shoot me before I shoot someone else.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#9 Apr 06 2010 at 5:48 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,496 posts
I've actually been looking for a decent RTS game lately. The last C&C game I played was Yuri's Revenge. Any recommendations? Preferably a few years old since my gaming rig is down and this machine only has an 8800GTX.
#10 Apr 06 2010 at 8:02 AM Rating: Good
Terrorfiend
*****
12,905 posts
id say Dawn of War 2 is the best RTS out there at the moment, but its focused on squad management rather than your traditional RTS that requires resource collection and buildings.

Sins of a Solar Empire is pretty cool for a space RTS.

if your looking for the traditional RTS, the last one i really enjoyed was warcraft 3, but thats pretty old.
#11 Apr 06 2010 at 8:59 AM Rating: Good
Gave Up The D
Avatar
*****
12,281 posts
Raolan wrote:
I've actually been looking for a decent RTS game lately. The last C&C game I played was Yuri's Revenge. Any recommendations? Preferably a few years old since my gaming rig is down and this machine only has an 8800GTX.


Star Craft
____________________________
Shaowstrike (Retired - FFXI)
91PUP/BLM 86SMN/BST 76DRK
Cooking/Fishing 100


"We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary."
— James D. Nicoll
#12 Apr 06 2010 at 1:24 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,496 posts
Quote:
if your looking for the traditional RTS, the last one i really enjoyed was warcraft 3, but thats pretty old.


Warcraft 3 was pretty good but the hero thing bugged me a little.

Quote:
Star Craft


Windows 7 really dislikes Starcraft. I played through a few times but kept losing my saved games so dropped it. I probably would have dropped it once I reached the zerg campaign anyway. That's one of those games I played too many times.
#13 Apr 06 2010 at 1:33 PM Rating: Good
Terrorfiend
*****
12,905 posts
Raolan wrote:
Quote:
if your looking for the traditional RTS, the last one i really enjoyed was warcraft 3, but thats pretty old.


Warcraft 3 was pretty good but the hero thing bugged me a little.

Quote:
Star Craft


Windows 7 really dislikes Starcraft. I played through a few times but kept losing my saved games so dropped it. I probably would have dropped it once I reached the zerg campaign anyway. That's one of those games I played too many times.


Seriously... Starcraft was a great game but... just no; too old.


If you didnt like the hero thing in WC3 dont even bother with DoW2 then hehe.

Try out sins of the solar empire. Its got some diplomacy and trading similar to civ, but imo is more focused on combat. Cool research trees too. Also should be pretty cheap and space sims always seem to run pretty well on most machines.


Edited, Apr 6th 2010 12:34pm by KTurner
#14 Apr 06 2010 at 2:17 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,496 posts
My dads roommate was a senior level programmer who spent most of his work day sitting in his office building maps and playing against other people in the building.

When I would go over there for a weekend or something we would usually end up with a 2 day, 20+ hour game between my dad, his roommate, his neighbor, and myself. I mean armys marching in, tearing you down to nothing but a command center, then marching off and standing guard at the resource sites. These games would get flat out brutal.

I'll have to check out Sins of the Solar Empire. I was always a fan on the Civ series.
#15 Apr 06 2010 at 10:05 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
29,919 posts
look for a bargain bin copy of homeworld II as well if sins of a solar empire sounds interesting. Best RTS ever!
____________________________
Arch Duke Kaolian Drachensborn, lvl 95 Ranger, Unrest Server
Tech support forum | FAQ (Support) | Mobile Zam: http://m.zam.com (Premium only)
Forum Rules
#16 Apr 06 2010 at 10:48 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,443 posts
Quote:
Warcraft 3 was pretty good but the hero thing bugged me a little.


Been a while since I played Warcraft 3, but did you lose if your hero died? If not then it's not really much different from getting Tanya in Red Alert, for instance. You'll have a hard time avoiding hero units in modern games (thinking back, I can't find a game without hero units).

Supreme Commander 2 isn't bad, though, if you're looking for a run-of-the-mill RTS game. It has epic tank rush battles (if that's your poison) and sweet graphics. It does have the whole "hero" thing, but in this case, your hero (or commander) is basically a mobile construction yard - that shoots laser beams, I kid you not. Whether you focus on upgrading your hero unit to be more durable and combat worthy, or just keep him around in the base to build and repair, is up to you. You don't have to dump him into the fray if you don't want to. There are also several "hero" units, if you can call them that. Compare them to the Mammoth tank in Command & Conquer: Red Alert, for instance. Heavy price tag, massive carnage.

E3 gameplay trailer

Edited, Apr 7th 2010 7:04am by Mazra
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#17 Apr 07 2010 at 4:28 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Mazra wrote:
Been a while since I played Warcraft 3, but did you lose if your hero died? If not then it's not really much different from getting Tanya in Red Alert, for instance. You'll have a hard time avoiding hero units in modern games (thinking back, I can't find a game without hero units).

The game doesn't end when they die, but they're a much much bigger part of the game than Tanya ever was.
#18 Apr 07 2010 at 3:15 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,443 posts
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Mazra wrote:
Been a while since I played Warcraft 3, but did you lose if your hero died? If not then it's not really much different from getting Tanya in Red Alert, for instance. You'll have a hard time avoiding hero units in modern games (thinking back, I can't find a game without hero units).

The game doesn't end when they die, but they're a much much bigger part of the game than Tanya ever was.


I don't know. Tanya was pretty damn hot useful. She could really mess up a base something fierce if she was left alone.

But yes, Warcraft sort of revolved around the hero units whereas Tanya was more of a bonus unit.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 124 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (124)