blank My CNCSeries
Username:
Password:
blank
(Register)
Content Overview Files Database Tiberium Wars Section Red Alert 3 Section Zero Hour Section Generals Section Yuris Revenge Section Red Alert 2 Section Renegade Section About CNCSeries
» FAQ · History
» Staff · Contact Us

Header
blank
» Forum » Comments » Article: Red Alert 3: Ideas for Change


Ideas for ChangeIdeas for Change (12.03.2005)
Neo_James, the latest addition to our staff, has written an interesting piece discussing some ideas for the direction RA3 should take in terms of keeping an essence of familiarity, whilst introducing new features.
Previous Thread In Forum Previous Thread ¦ Next Thread Next thread in forum
Page 1 of 212--»
RobIconArticle: Red Alert 3: Ideas for Change10:11 13.03.05 

Founder


Reps: 1598

#1, 928 Posts


blank
Firstly, well done on your first article Justin. You raise some interesting points.

One thing I'm inclined to disagree with however, is the topic of adding multiple options for infantry units. This is down to personal preference. I prefer simple, fast gameplay. Giving a conscript the ability to do several extra things would simply be too time consuming in my opinion. In order to maintain a good game-speed, you have to sacrifice some unit abilities. Don't get me wrong, extra abilities would be nice and create a lot of new strategies, but in order to actually work properly it would result in slower gameplay.

As for your ideas in regard to preventing the rush, do we really need a solution? Look how popular Red Alert 2 was in its day (and still is). Whilst many players will simply never be able to comprehend the speed that seasoned players can build and play at, it remains the one major aspect of Red Alert 2 that has kept me interested in the game to date.

Your point about revamping some units is a good one. Like you said, it's a shame the tesla tank was so useless (bluntly put). Making sure that there are no 'dud' units is quite a challenge. Some will always be more useful than others, but assuring we have no squids, cuban terrorists etc, would go a long way to increasing the scope and strategies of the game.
 
PaulIcon...12:18 13.03.05 

( . Y . )


 Reps: 465

#2, 317 Posts


blank
The point about infantry was more my thing, so don't blame him for that Tongue

It would have to be very carefully done, though, and if they thought they couldn't pull it off perfectly then it would be best to leave it plain and simple. All or nothing.
 
GobblesIcon...05:51 15.03.05 

 Reps: 16

#152, 6 Posts


blank
I think that infantry should remain simple. But only in large scale battles, it was good in the original command & conquer and Red Alert that there was also missions that only gave you a few units that you had to use wisely, in these situations being able to use soldiers efficiently by having more control over them or even simulating them in first person would be very strategic and compinsate the fun of building large bases and having large battles. Soldiers should also be smaller, i loved how the original command and conquer how the units were appropriately scaled, in Red alert 2, the soldiers looked good but they were too big, and made tanks look rediculously small.
The Story should be dark and twisted like in the original. Red Alert 2 was fun and it did have a good story but there were alot of cheesy parts that robbed the realism from the game, like the end of Yuris Revenge on the Alied side was a bit lame compared to the original RA and CnC endings.
Red Alert 3 should follow the original RA just as much as much as it should RA2 because it is what made the Red Alert universe a classic. I haven't played Generals, so i can't judge what it could include from it. And there needs to be more natural battle feilds! In RA2 and Tiberian Sun i found it cliched how nearly everything was fought in the middle of cities. It would be cool to hide your soldiers in forests and ambush enemy soldiers as they come by and have beatiful natural landscapes. And move through jungles and sneak up on the enemy base. And there should be more ways of winning a battle then building lots of tanks and invading, i enjoyed missions were you have to distract the enemy defence while you sneak an engineer into their buildings.
And if i am posting this in the wrong place and making a total ass of myself, then sorry i am very new hear.
 
CalIcon...17:16 15.03.05 

 Reps: 175

#19, 156 Posts


blank
I think infantry and all cheap units should remain fairly simple as they are cheap therefor hsould not have many features. I think there should be lots of controls for every unit but universal ones lyk gaurd patrol etc.....not specifics.
 
RobIcon...17:34 15.03.05 

Founder


Reps: 1598

#1, 928 Posts


blank

Originally posted by Gobbles...
And there needs to be more natural battle feilds! In RA2 and Tiberian Sun i found it cliched how nearly everything was fought in the middle of cities. It would be cool to hide your soldiers in forests and ambush enemy soldiers as they come by and have beatiful natural landscapes.


That's an excellent idea. It's possible in Red Alert 2 to a very limited extent (e.g. on the orchards in Heartland). However, one would then have to consider whether or not to turn off automatic tool tips. Any good player has this setting on so they can see any enemy infantry units or structures that have been placed behind objects.

Certainly more focus on the effect of the enviroment would result in a greater number of strategies and better depth of gameplay. As it is, hills are pretty much the only thing that are of importance.
 
GobblesIcon...11:07 16.03.05 

 Reps: 16

#152, 6 Posts


12:35 16.03.05 - Edited

Also one of the things i loved about RA1 and RA2 was how rich the colours and contrast were. In alot of the games made these days, the colours are much more dull, and the contrast is low, because they are aimed at being more realistic looking rather then imaginative and colourfull. In 1997 for exampe, alot of the games used gourode shading (well atleast the ones i played) more which gave it great contrast and depth, but now they rely more on smooth polygons.

I actually prefer playing the originals (RA1 & CnC) because they are simple and fun. It's annoying when they have unneccisary things to show off the new graphics engine, and all it does is make it more complicated and confusing.
 
bigguy563Icon...22:23 17.03.05 

reputed member


Reps: 924

#34, 545 Posts


blank
If it came to a choice between colors and contrast, and better gameplay, I have no doubt in my mind that I would choose gameplay.
 
GobblesIcon...04:41 18.03.05 

 Reps: 16

#152, 6 Posts


04:48 18.03.05 - Edited

I think it should feature much more stealthy gameplay, things like planning ambushes, camoflauged buildings, having varieties of walls and fences for different purposes, for example: Concrete walls can with-stand heavy fire, but soldiers can easily climb over them, but they can't walk over barbed fence, which can also be destroyed or crushed by vehicles.
I don't know if this is really a bad thing, but the Allied buildings in RA2 looked like they were made out of lego and mechano peices. I think it would be good to have perhaps a cross between RA2 and CnC style buildings because there has to be a cross over between RA & CnC one day, and they should be similar to what the buildings looked like in the ORIGINAL CnC game. I hated it how they had to change everything in Renegade atleast a little bit from the original.

Having bunkers would be cool, you could have them leading to underground levels of your base instead of just one. This could maybe explain how buildings pop up underground. Or you could show the construction yard visibly placing the building with its crane, (although it could look rediculous having a crane reaching far across the map to place a building).
But realism really shouldn't overpower the gameplay. Having things that would seem unpractrical in real life is ok if it is fun in terms of gameplay.
 
jacko3334Icon...13:53 18.03.05 


 Reps: 509

#51, 281 Posts


blank
I think they need to be careful in implementing stuff such as ambushes and the like. Sure it sounds good in concept, but in its final manifestation it often doesn't work out at all. Simplicity has alot of things going for it in my opinion.
 
GobblesIcon...04:41 21.03.05 

 Reps: 16

#152, 6 Posts


05:11 21.03.05 - Edited

One of the worst things about tiberian sun was that they used actors playing as the commanders instead of the player being the commander. I loved in CnC, RA and RA2 how they spoke to you as if you are the commander, it really immersed you into the game, my favourite part was in CnC when there was the movie of Kane directly talking to you as if the war is actually happening in the real world and that you are connected to it through the EVA software. When Kane tells you things like "it is only a matter of time before i find out where you live commander" really made me feel like it was happening. And how they have the channel flicking at the intro movie created the perfect setting that i could relate to, because these days (where i live atleast) whenever i turn onto the news it tells about the wars happening in Iraq etc... but none of it is happening anywhere near where i live, and life seems to go on as if nothing is happening...
But in RA1 it was the oppisite, instead of being a war between to 2 forces that both appear to have good intentions from different points of view and the true evil side seems less powerfull, there is a large army invading all of Europe.
Each game is original in its own way, so i think it is up to the creators to develop originality.
 
AUTOIcon...02:13 31.03.05 

 Reps: 23

#176, 13 Posts


blank
I personally believe the game should be 2D to continue on the legacy of Red Alert. 3D will upset the hard core RA fans and will cease online gaming. The story should continue in its sense as usual with nothing to dramatic. A new unit or two for each side would be nice as well. The online gaming experience should be as it was in Yuri. Clan ranking and special honors and awards with cash prizes would also stimulate a lot of people to compete. The rankings should also include more badges, medals, things you can earn. The key think is to not make to much change. Thank You.
 
GobblesIcon...12:31 31.03.05 

 Reps: 16

#152, 6 Posts


blank
Well, if you don't change anything then what's the point? You may as well just play RA2. I prefer 2d. 3d is just really confusing and distracts the player, i really don't see the point of it. But i would like to see battles between seperate islands, That was the coolest thing about RA1. RA2 tried to be more realistic by having just one huge island most of the time which made it feel less defensive. Also, the thing i didn't like about red alert 2 was how (especially in multimplayer) you can capture all of the ore pumps, build alot of units like prism tanks and you can easilly over-power your enemy's base defences. I liked the strategy of building up your base defences so you can defend yourself while you create weopons to invade, but to bring down the base, you have to be sneeky about it. I could see a really cool 3d RA if it's bases were built on islands.
 
bigguy563Icon...15:25 31.03.05 

reputed member


Reps: 924

#34, 545 Posts


blank
It should remain 2d, but you cant pick up the story right after YR ends, unless they decide to throw another time machine in there because the losing side is far too week to make any attempt to overthrow the side which won the war.
 
GobblesIcon...03:49 03.04.05 

 Reps: 16

#152, 6 Posts


blank
I think we've had enough of time machines and cheesy actors for now. RA2 and YR were fun, and the story was allright, but some of the actors were terrible especially for being "hollywood actors" I mean in RA1, the actor who was playing Einstein looked quite similar to him, in RA2 he was too fat and looked nothing like him and really was annoying. It was the same with tanya, in RA1 she looked like a real soldier (in the cut-scenes), in RA2 she looked like a more like a perfect super model which made it more unrealistic and cliched. It was as if it was purposely done as a joke. This is why RA1 was such an epic battle and had such a good story, CnC & RA1 had the best endings to them, especially RA1 that reveiled important info like kane and how he influenced Stalin and RA2's endings were more of a joke.
 
moab_there_buttIconimo19:59 04.07.05 

 Reps: 12

#76, 2 Posts


blank
well for ra3 you mentioned the game engine and new ideas coming into play... well i think they should have alot of the ideas from battle for middle earth come into ra3. not all of them but a good deal of them... such as...

-unit fromations
-emotions in battle
-multi taksing units (nothing new but would be great)
-enviroment interaction (like your men can hide behined rocks and treas to take less damege)
-terrain effects (crossing a river with your men will slow you down, going up hill will slow you down, going down hill will spead you up.)


i know for a fact that this stuff here would be great to add in the game. its somthing that was well looked upon and gave more depth for battle. but as for experimitation... well one thing that i see in many games that seems to work well with peaple is custimisation. you now have ownership or some sence of ownership that these are your solders... like outfitting your men before a battle with certain itams along with your tanks. this could make them better suited for your style of playing. what ever you add to them will have a positive and negitive effect on your units. things such as more weapons added to one unit will make him terribly slow and an easy target. while other units that are armed with one gun and thats it (like a conscript) will be fast and quick to attacking. this is just an example is what im saying... you could go into like a custome army menue and design what you want your men to be outfitted with. this will create speceil task force units to be molded around your preferd type of playing. you can creat multiple types of armys and what not. this will be great in my opinion. this means you can have a fast pace game or a slow paced game. or better yet a fair mix of both. those units you designed with all the guns and armour on them will be expensive and slow... so make sure you have what it takes in your strategy to best take out the enamy. this would be great. i can see it working well with everyone. is this something you would see in a cnc game? well no you wouldnt... but in all it would be great.
 


Post A Reply
Page 1 of 212--»
Navigation:

CNCSeries.Com