netnerd85 wrote on Sep 1, 2012, 10:19:

Jerykk wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 23:10:
because Generals: Zero Hour is the best C&C game yet.

LOL, incorrect. You Generals fans, so funny.

You seem to be lost. Perhaps you should try 4chan or YouTube? They may cater better to your particular style of debate.

Jerykk wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 23:10:

Rhett wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 13:57:
$50? Really?

TFD has all the best games on it, and it's only $20. I would NOT pay $30 for Red Alert 3 + C&C 3 (and I won't even mention that other terrible piece of shit they tacked on).

I hope you're referring to C&C4, because Generals: Zero Hour is the best C&C game yet.

0 Hour was rad and was more than an expansion IMO. I still have it too. C&C4 was awful. RA3 was meh too.

I wonder if the old C&C and RA games will be updated with this release like its multiplayer. I doubt it like The First Decade set.

panbient wrote on Sep 1, 2012, 11:08:
They need to bring back dinosaur missions.

No, the ant missions in Red Alert 1!

They need to bring back dinosaur missions.

Jerykk wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 23:10:
because Generals: Zero Hour is the best C&C game yet.

LOL, incorrect. You Generals fans, so funny.

Rhett wrote on Sep 1, 2012, 03:21:

Jerykk wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 23:10:

Rhett wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 13:57:
$50? Really?

TFD has all the best games on it, and it's only $20. I would NOT pay $30 for Red Alert 3 + C&C 3 (and I won't even mention that other terrible piece of shit they tacked on).

I hope you're referring to C&C4, because Generals: Zero Hour is the best C&C game yet.

Zero Hour/Generals are on The First Decade, so no, they're not on my "shit-list". =P C&C 3 + RA3 + C&C 4 are, however. (C&C 3 had its moments though)

I thought RA3 was better than C&C3. Wasn't a big fan of the co-op campaigns, though. Anywho, I think the main appeal of this bundle is that it gives you digital downloads of the pre-C&C3 games that you currently can't find anywhere else. I don't see myself picking this up for $50 but a $20 sale would be more plausible.

All these games were online was, who can build the most tanks the fastest. I rather go without.

Jerykk wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 23:10:

Rhett wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 13:57:
$50? Really?

TFD has all the best games on it, and it's only $20. I would NOT pay $30 for Red Alert 3 + C&C 3 (and I won't even mention that other terrible piece of shit they tacked on).

I hope you're referring to C&C4, because Generals: Zero Hour is the best C&C game yet.

Zero Hour/Generals are on The First Decade, so no, they're not on my "shit-list". =P C&C 3 + RA3 + C&C 4 are, however. (C&C 3 had its moments though)

Rhett wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 13:57:
$50? Really?

TFD has all the best games on it, and it's only $20. I would NOT pay $30 for Red Alert 3 + C&C 3 (and I won't even mention that other terrible piece of shit they tacked on).

I hope you're referring to C&C4, because Generals: Zero Hour is the best C&C game yet.

Lobster wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 13:18:
What? No Sole Survivor!?

The first rule of Command & Conquer club is that you don't mention Sole Survivor.

Old games! New DRM!

<vomit>

Silicon Avatar wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 13:58:
Is that the same Van Caneghem who used to run New World Computing and do all those Might and Magic games?

Yep! Industrygamers interview

Responsible for 'reinventing' the C&C series for the last 3 years...

Is that the same Van Caneghem who used to run New World Computing and do all those Might and Magic games?

$50? Really?

TFD has all the best games on it, and it's only $20. I would NOT pay $30 for Red Alert 3 + C&C 3 (and I won't even mention that other terrible piece of shit they tacked on).

MattyC wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 11:51:
I hold a similar view. None of the stuff was the same once EA got into the mix, but it was at least tolerable. I still enjoyed the campy fun CG and Kane. Once C&C 4 came out I was like... nope... not doing this. I mean they made a C&C game where you don't even have bases. Who thought that was a good idea? Had they played any of the other C&C games?

They tried to turn it into a RTS Arena game like DotA or HoN. EA saw that they didn't have a title in that genre and wanted to jump in. Sadly, they chose the C&C IP to do this with since their brains think all RTS are the same so if WC3 can do it, why not C&C?

As a side note, for some reason I occasionally get an urge to play Renegade again. My brain keeps telling me RTS and FPS should never mix, but my heart keeps wanting it to. Although, I should probably just play Savage II or Sacrifice as they did it a lot better.

NegaDeath wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 11:11:
Though Kane is a hoot. Seriously does the actor that plays him not age or something? I swear he looks the same in every release.

True villains don't age, they simply grow more evil.

What? No Sole Survivor!?

dheer wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 11:08:

netnerd85 wrote on Aug 31, 2012, 10:39:

as we deliver the next great Command & Conquer experience next year

Do ANY original fans of the series give two f*cks about the sh*t they dribble out now?

Nope. I don't think even they know what they're doing with the franchise any longer either.

I loved the C&C series and ate up anything released under that name for a long time. Tiberium Wars came out and I was like that was....ok and I still had some fun with it. Red Alert 3 was pretty much in the same boat. Then came Tiberian Twilight. I don't know what the hell happened. The game took everything that was great about the series and removed it. I wish I could remove it from existence, let alone my steam collection.

I hold a similar view. None of the stuff was the same once EA got into the mix, but it was at least tolerable. I still enjoyed the campy fun CG and Kane. Once C&C 4 came out I was like... nope... not doing this. I mean they made a C&C game where you don't even have bases. Who thought that was a good idea? Had they played any of the other C&C games?

Extract 26.4GB "EA_is_Cancer_to_CnC.zip" file to C:\Users\xxxxx\Documents\My Received Files\xxxxx\History

is this how you are going to do this, EA, like last time?

please PLEASE , DO. NOT. TARNISH. Generals2, like you did to CNC 3, 4, and RA3, I BEG of you EA. BE NICE to the new DEV TEAM, and deliver something that is TRULY WORTHY to the LEGACY that is COMMAND & CONQUER.

because, so far EA, all you are good at doing, is COMMAND & BONQUER.

signed, EVERYONE THAT HAS EVER LOVED CNC

p.s, I really am going to buy Gen2, and play it, naturally, but I will get a heart attack, if it doesn't deliver.

don't stray too far from the success of Gen & Zero Hour gameplay.

All we ask for , is much of the same, improved multiplayer experience (no lag), the nice new Frostbite graphics, great!

But please... ugh, just.... don't give me a heart attack.

Didn't they have another re-release a few years ago called the First Decade?

If I remember correctly, the original game code updates were farmed out to another company (Broken Lizard?) and ended up being an almost complete functional disaster. After the release, there were several attempts at fixing the bugs, but EA finally gave it up as hopeless and the gamer community had to step forward with their own patches which fixed some of the problems. EA evidently recognized the value and hosted it on their own official forums, albeit as an unofficial patch.

I'm sorry EA, but based on how badly you did on the First Decade, I have no reason to think this release will be any better.