Command and Conquer Tiberium Wars

[Master Replicator]

Im surprised no one has yet discussed this topic. This game is f***ing awesome. If i had a better graphics card id be playing it. Its probably the best game i ever bought, besides Warcraft 3 i have always loved war3. Played it since war 1. At anyrate Tiberium Wars is the best game by Command and Conquer. Google it. It has graphics probably on par or better then the up comming Starcraft 2 and omg I would so be playing it if my system could handle it. Also thank God for my 1 gig of ram luckily the only thing holding me back from playing this game all the time is my graphics card a Raedeon 1900 i think which isnt even supported by this game. Dang IT! lol If you can get the Kane Edition it is a limited time edition. But it has an extra dvd of strategies and all about the sides and weaknesses and strengths of them. I also think Nod is glitched or something in this game because their power plants all you have to do is get a few and upgrade them and omg you have power for the rest of the dang game. Where as GDI and The Scrin have to build more inorder to get such an effect.

 

[donut3.5]

Terrible game IMO, all graphics no gameplay.
The "gameplay" was entirely linear, the teams played pretty much exactly the same way, godawful superweapons, campaign was meh, online play was.. like any other game.
All in all, I expected so much better after Generals: Zero Hour. C&C3 doesn't even deserve to be in the shadow of that game.
--donut3.5--

 

[Grade A Kill]

Command and conquer 3 is what Donut said, all graphics, no gameplay. I bought that game, preordered it, it was moderatly fun until i played online, where it is just massing mammoth tanks. so i quit the game. Here is everything i saw wrong with it:

Units: small unit vareity featuring Rock-paper-scissors gameplay. where one unit is specificly made to counter another specific unit.

no strategy: massing mammoth tanks is all you do, i want realistic stratgy like flanks.

Scrin: the scrin were made very uncreativly, just look at the gunwalker, the buzzers, and the tripod anihalator.

incredeble cheap assness: i once beat my freind 30 second into the game by building an engineer, walker over, see hes building refinerys, capture his MCV, pack it up and roll away with it.



Unrealistic combat: Units stand in one place and shoot each other, and its like "riflemen" > "Nod militia" no matter what that is the outcome, when you garrison you cant run up and try to storm the occupied building, you just shoot at the walls, you cant even shoot the people out throught the windows, nor can your supresive fire keep the enemy from firing back at you. and, perhaps the most damming of all, a tank shoots and infantry man, and the shell takes 0ff 1/2 pf the infantries' health, yeah...if you take a direct hit from a tank shell...your dead. most units dont have secondary weapons, orcas need a gun on them to shoot infantry nstead of wasting rockets on them, venoms shuld have some anti-vehicle capabilities too. (though most dont care about realistic combat because they've never witnessed a realisic game, soon however i will show everyone one)

(this is only my opinion) a game with realistic combat just looks incredable, i am soon going to post a thread about my favorite RTS Sudden Strike 2 RWM (real warfare mod) so that more people will have heard of it, and also witness its incedable combat.

 

[Master Replicator]

Oh please a capitol ship can take out mammoths. Plus they get upgraded shields and best part of the "uncreative" scrin is their air units.but like you probably i dont like the way they attack other guys their attack animation is crazy stupid.

 

[Grade A Kill]

if you want an incredebly kick ass strategy game get supreme commander, you need an incredebly good video card, good RAM, and a good processor. you havent seen the full potential of a strategy game if you havent seen supreme commander, if you dont wanna spend $150 dollors for a 8800 GTX nvidia video card then i'd suggest sudden Strike 2 RWM (real warfare mod) i'll setup that thread once i get a few screenshots and vids to show off its greatness.

I dont know why you think that game is so good, whats so fun about massing mammoth tanks, what other options do other people use? its too fast paced, strategy games with base building sucks (only if its too fast paced) and for gods sake if you can instantly capture and sell buildings like an MCV, then what the hell kinda strategy game is this?

 

[Zombie]

I think that Tiberium Wars was worse then Generals: Zero Hour (especially with Shockwave mod) I also agree that is all graphics, no gameplay, just like TES: Oblivion. I think all the new games only concentrate on graphics, instead of gameplay, I hope they won't make this mistake with Starcraft II

 

[Mechanical Man]

Tiberium Wars suck because:
-First C&C was the first strategy which was a very good mix of realism and fun gameplay.
-Imbalanced. Only thing you need to do is to tech up and produce the best unit and only that unit. Unless you win with some cheap ass tactic with engineers the guy said above. And with GDI is that even easier.
-Ugly units. The appearance of the units makes no sense and NOD units are wtf shaped. I won't tell anything about Scrin, which do not even fit in this game.
-The storyline does not even seem connected with that of Tiberian sun, only thing that matters is Kane is a omfg badass and nothing else. They should proceed with more discrete storyline like in their predecessors not Aliens invade Earth & destroy any living creature etc
-Instead of adding a lame alien race ripped from retarded hollywood movies, they could include something connected with the story like The Forgotten (mutants), while now you get mutants only from some neutral building and they suck.
-Infantry come in squads. This gives you much less control over them. And they are killed very easily (unlike Tiberian sun) and there is nothing to heal them on the battlefield like a medic. (only GDI have armory to send the injured troops there, it took me a while to realize that)

There are still little improvements, like improved interface, attack move command, multiple build queues, ...

 

[Steel_Stallion]

The entire series stuck with the same formula. And its been succesful. Its gotten great reviews by critics, its selling like dope. Ya, its Rock, Paper, Scissors gameplay. Its linear.

its always been like that, if it aint broke dont fix it. Because its done so well in the past, and its still doing well. Its a simpler strategy game, nothing complex, and its fun.

Btw Mechanical man, the Scrin first appeared in tiberium sun (Well, a crashed ship, but evidence of them was there. The NOD were researching it). So they are sticking to the storyline.

Its a fun game. Massing and raging warfare makes C&C fun. And tell me any other game in the entire franchise that ever did it different.

 

[donut3.5]

Tell you of another game that wasn't that style?
C&C Generals. Each team played completely differently, then you had the generals for variation. Nothing kept you on your toes like the stealth general, whereas the demo general had a completely different tactic.
None of it was rock paper scissors, it was more like rock, paper, scissors, some other object to counter those, another object to counter all of that, but then one more object to counter that one but is vulnerable to the last. In other words, it was a ton more in depth gameplay. The C&C3 gameplay seemed so linear, it was only fun for the first week, if that.
--donut3.5--

 

[Zombie]

I changed my mind. Tiberium Wars is cool in multi, but Generals is better (especially Shockwave mod)

 

[Grade A Kill]

cool in multi-player? massing mammoth tanks, what else do people do?

The origonal C&C was realy good, i got it as a preorder bonus for C&C3 and damn it is fun, combat that was realistic enough for me, and fun gameplay, and it was kinda advanced for its time, like missle vehicles, some missles can actually miss, maybe kill less troops, it was just cool.

what C&C 3 needs is more unit variations, slightly more realistic gameplay, and some vehicles need secondary weapons, and no rock paper scissors, rifle man vs nod militia, those fights need to be decided by chance, no more Rifle man automaticly beat militia.

ya know the reason why i even preordered it, i saw this one clip of an orca gunning up this one building, what happened to the orca's machine gun?!?

 

[TheDivineBoss]

You are looking too good into tiny details, stop it -_-

 

[Mechanical Man]

Grade A Kill, can you stfu about you 'chance to hit'? Do you know why is Starcraft the best RTS? It has a minimal amount of randomness included, which could turn the tide of the battle, so the winner is determined by skill, not by luck. Thats why I do not like playing turn base strategy much.

 

[Zombie]

Grade A Kill, it's true that people are always spamming mammoth tanks, and those are fucking indestructable.

 

[Grade A Kill]

so is there a problem with massing mammoth tanks? you say its true but do you like it?

oh and mechanicle man, realism means realistic tactics, so tactical skill decides the outcome, not just chance. besides, is something wrong about realism in a strategy game? would command and conquer suck with realism?

 

[Shadow_Fox]

CNC2 Was awesome. Seriously. CNC3 was as stated, all graphics no gameplay..SupCom is fun but i get bored quickly of it, Oblivion was terrible. I enjoyed generals thoroughly but i lost the discs (lolwut). These days, to much emphasis is put on graphics, i wouldn't care if every game had graphics from 2002 as long as they had innovative and fun gameplay.

 

[Zombie]

Grade A Kill, of course I don't like it. Why would anyone like getting their asses kicked by some indestructable giant armor monsters, that kill everything that gets in their way.

 

[TheDivineBoss]

It's called fantasy and fiction.

 

[Zombie]

And also, GDI's indestructable mammoth tank can't be hijacked, not like the Avatar of NOD, cuz when it dies, the enemy always captures it. I can only recapture it if I use it for defence, but who the hell would use an offensive unit for defence?

 

[Grade A Kill]

lets just conclude this argument, C&C 3 is all graphics, no gameplay, let us stop arguing.
How did C&C3 get sponsered to be in World Cyber Games anyway?

 

[TheDivineBoss]

Because they wanted to annoy people like you.

 

[Grade A Kill]

well they did quite a good job didn't they

 

[punwisp]

cool in multi-player? massing mammoth tanks, what else do people do?

The origonal C&C was realy good, i got it as a preorder bonus for C&C3 and damn it is fun, combat that was realistic enough for me, and fun gameplay, and it was kinda advanced for its time, like missle vehicles, some missles can actually miss, maybe kill less troops, it was just cool.

what C&C 3 needs is more unit variations, slightly more realistic gameplay, and some vehicles need secondary weapons, and no rock paper scissors, rifle man vs nod militia, those fights need to be decided by chance, no more Rifle man automaticly beat militia.

ya know the reason why i even preordered it, i saw this one clip of an orca gunning up this one building, what happened to the orca's machine gun?!?

What you stop with the realistic crap? Realism ISN'T WHAT MAKES A GAME GOOD, GAMEPLAY DOES. You have no clue what your talking About

Anyway, Like previous posts, its all graphics and little gameplay, they wanted there game to look pretty. Hell the expansion didn't even changed the gameplay any, they just added generals and super units. Oh and a Nod Campaign

the first C&C 3 had a horrible storyline, they didnt link it to the past games, until the expansion.

Generals actually wasnt bad, and i still play that sometimes, with shockwave mod and AI mod, makes it very challenging, including facing GLA.

Anyway its dumb how some of you think C&C 3 is having same graphics as SC2... There nothing alike, Blizz wants pple to be able to play the game, they want the game to be compatible with most comps, C&C 3 is just too high of graphics, you have to have a freaking nividia 8600 or something to play it at its full potential.

Blizz is better at making RTS games then EA, but EA is going to actually try with RA3, they messed up C&C 3, they know it, they don't want to ruin this Franchise. RA3 has VERY similar graphics to SC2, And in my opinion, they might both be a tie, if EA does there homework, and focus on gameplay like blizz, and not rush it just for the money. Look at screenshots, very similar, seems like a race


Also guys, a company can get MILLIONS of dollars just by slapping the name on a game.

 

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

The scrin are awesome... they just don't make any sense at all. It's a retarded plot but the race is nice.

 

[Grade A Kill]

actually punwisp, realism is what makes a game good, you never played a realistic so you wouldn't know, and besides i just did shut up about realism, that is until you started yelling at me again.

how is RA3 gonna be any different that C&C 3
-sea units
-coop campaign

thats about it

 

[Tyranid]

In my opinnion when a game has dragons flying above villages, torching them, or mages flinging fireballs or a single hero taking on a tribe of giants or huge armada of space ships flying in the planets atmosphere you can't really talk about realism anymore.

 

[punwisp]

actually punwisp, realism is what makes a game good, you never played a realistic so you wouldn't know, and besides i just did shut up about realism, that is until you started yelling at me again.

how is RA3 gonna be any different that C&C 3
-sea units
-coop campaign

thats about it

Lol Thats funny, guess me being a RTS Veteren means nothing? To "You" Realism is what makes a good game, but thats not even close to a fact, infact not a lot of people have the same opinion as you.

Also if you opened your eyes so far RA3 is ALOT different. For one the campaign was bad in C&C 3 because it didnt really link to the past or anything, and C&C 3 had no naval units or "sea" units, RA3 Follows the same storyline, it is just based off a soviet mission gone wrong.

Also makes sense when you try comparing RA3 and C&C3 saying they will be the same, we already know you dont have any idea what your talking about, It just shows you didnt even compared any of it, just assumed EA would screw this one up to.

actually punwisp, realism is what makes a game good, you never played a realistic so you wouldn't know, and besides i just did shut up about realism, that is until you started yelling at me again.

If that statement was true then blizzard wouldn't be making any money, just like other companies, Blizzard is one of the best gaming companies in the world, and none of there games have any realism, its all fantasy and fiction.

Here's a tip, start saying "in my opinion" Not trying to state facts that arnt facts or anything. We wouldn't see all these great games like warcraft and dawn of war(which by the way or VERY popular and fun) Remember "Realsim" really has nothing to do with a game being good, a real RTS player knows its the gameplay that counts, not the graphics or realism.

Besides if all games had to be realistic, all games that had alien creatures, monsters, demons simply wouldnt be in the game. Not only would gaming be boring, but there wouldnt be any creativity. Most FPS games on the same system have the same controls, Also over half of FPS games only have Humans in it....Boring in most cases

 

[RoughneckLeader]

What is with you and mammoth tanks? play Kane's wrath! The subfaction "Marked of Kane"'s regular troops have EMP! Every time they mass them and send them in, a semi-good micro can jsut EMP them and use NOD aircraft/rocket troops(they are powerful in numbers)/tanks.

Anyways,

C&C3 did not deserve the C&C title; only Kane's Wrath was good (well, the campaign and world-conquering mode). Red Alert 3 is returning back to the original, even with slight cartoon-y graphics. It's also going back to the grid way! Red Alert games were friggen' awsume!

 

[Grade A Kill]

i wish i didn't pre-order this, although that was back when i thought C&C was good, a big waste of $50 but atleast i got the origonal C&C as a pre-order bonus, until it stopped working for some reason. and god dammit, when i say realistic, i dont mean the setting of the game, just the combat, remember that please.

 

[Lord_Nor]

I think if you guys want to see a good review of Tiberium wars, you can match it up almost exactly (albeit one being an FPS and another an RTS) to TheEscapist's Zero Punctuation review of Halo 3: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/8-Halo-3

Aka this game is average it is not bad, it is average, it is not exactly the most stunning RTS of all time but it is still somewhat enjoyable...

Also roughneckleader, RA3 has a large potential for fail because of the fact that westwood isnt making it but EA...

 

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

i wish i didn't pre-order this, although that was back when i thought C&C was good, a big waste of $50 but atleast i got the origonal C&C as a pre-order bonus, until it stopped working for some reason. and god dammit, when i say realistic, i dont mean the setting of the game, just the combat, remember that please.

Quit your fucking whining and get used to what games are, you pussy.

Don't like it? Don't play it, but ESPECIALLY DON'T WHINE ABOUT IT TO PEOPLE WHO DON'T CARE.

 

[punwisp]

I think if you guys want to see a good review of Tiberium wars, you can match it up almost exactly (albeit one being an FPS and another an RTS) to TheEscapist's Zero Punctuation review of Halo 3: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/8-Halo-3

Aka this game is average it is not bad, it is average, it is not exactly the most stunning RTS of all time but it is still somewhat enjoyable...

Also roughneckleader, RA3 has a large potential for fail because of the fact that westwood isnt making it but EA...

Though I agree, some pple from westwood that made the previous C&C games are taking part in this. Also both westwood and EA made RA2 and its a classic RTS. They know they didn't do too well on C&C 3, thats why they amde the expansion, mainly for the lore, to connect C&C tib abd C&C 3.

Anyway they don't want to ruin this one, they are taking notes from SC2 which explains the graphics, and so far they are doing very well. This time it isnt all about graphics like C&C 3

 

[RoughneckLeader]

Not all of EA's games are bad...The main people working on RA3 are the people that were in Westwood on the RA2 team. +Big budget, +they appear to actually want to make a good game this round...

Most of the units are coming back also. They "showcase", or present, their units & check the forums to see how they are liked; unlike Blizzard, who just put the stuff there and dont post/look at forums much (I'm not putting Blizz down).

Final point: If you look at the gameplay videos, they way the units react/die/attack/move/other & such are exactly the same as Red Alert 2; only difference is that its 3D now.

 

[punwisp]

Don't make assumptions too soon in the making, the reason they had the same voices was because of testint, they haven't implemented there own sounds yet, for mostly testing and for showing that preview they used RA2 voices. so No this isnt like RA2, seeing how the only difference is they used the same sound sets for testing.

 

[RoughneckLeader]

Look at the rest of my post...

They are at least having Hell's March back; in-fact, the original band that did Hell's March is coming back for RA3. So don't be supprised if they do use some original voices. It's coming out in october!

 

[punwisp]

Theirs a huge difference between using music and unit sounds, they used the same unit sounds from RA2 for a temporary use, for testing, its not official. They use music from previous games all the time. Yes I read your post, and doesn't change anything.

 

[potatotop]

C&C generals is so awsome! great graphics,futuristic gameplay (cool as!)

 

[potatotop]

: the best place to look for help is the end of your arm - wheres the squigly line?!

 

[punwisp]

Generals didnt have great graphics lolz, and it wasnt futuristic it was modern