| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:Given this kind of trend I was hoping RA2 to have more of the serious war tone, but that was not to be. It was also disappointing that the new features that Tiberian Sun had introduced (such as line of sight and ballistic physics actually applying to certain weapons, or how you still had to make silos to store your money--all of which made it a better game than its more popular brother Starcraft in my view) were gone, gone, gone. Westwood had also done nothing to stop the constant spamming of units that unbalanced both the original Command and Conquer, as well as Red Alert 1. RA2 was not a bad game, but I expected more from Westwood. Too bad it was the point where the classic Westwood died, which was a pity since Westwood was so much more than C&C. Ever heard of Lands of Lore, Nox, Emperor: Battle for Dune, Legend of Kyrandia, Earth and Beyond, or Eye of the Beholder? No? Then you're living proof, one among millions, of how EA thoroughly destroyed the soul of Westwood and turned it into a money farm for producing C&C and RA titles. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 02:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC) | :Given this kind of trend I was hoping RA2 to have more of the serious war tone, but that was not to be. It was also disappointing that the new features that Tiberian Sun had introduced (such as line of sight and ballistic physics actually applying to certain weapons, or how you still had to make silos to store your money--all of which made it a better game than its more popular brother Starcraft in my view) were gone, gone, gone. Westwood had also done nothing to stop the constant spamming of units that unbalanced both the original Command and Conquer, as well as Red Alert 1. RA2 was not a bad game, but I expected more from Westwood. Too bad it was the point where the classic Westwood died, which was a pity since Westwood was so much more than C&C. Ever heard of Lands of Lore, Nox, Emperor: Battle for Dune, Legend of Kyrandia, Earth and Beyond, or Eye of the Beholder? No? Then you're living proof, one among millions, of how EA thoroughly destroyed the soul of Westwood and turned it into a money farm for producing C&C and RA titles. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 02:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC) | ||
::Totally agree with you. The first C&C and RA was still the best for me. For C&C, even though the number of units and gameplay is not as good as the later games, the storyline and the atomsphere was still the best of all. Kane actually tried to murder civilians and pin them on GDI. When he failed to do so, he just fabricated the story anyway...gotta love the story and the man.--[[User:Wildcards|Wildcards]] 13:48, 22 April 2011 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 18:48, 22 April 2011
Game Reviews
Anybody agree that this was the best C&C game ever? BeardedHoplite 23:18, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- Not to me it wasn't. As a fan of the classic Westwood Studios, to me the campy cutscenes and simple gameplay are quite a step backward from the original Red Alert's serious tone and the new features Tiberian Sun introduced. Now before you tell me to go play World In Conflict instead (which features a similar "USSR invades America" scenario but with a darker and more serious tone), here's a sampling of what the original Red Alert had.
- Allied Side: Watching Tanya get tortured in the fifth mission, stopping a nuclear missile launch by the Soviets in the 10th (and watching Paris get obliterated by nuclear fire if you failed), and watching your own commandos bloodily gut enemy sentries.
- Soviet Side: Watching Soviet Yak planes strafe a village full of civilians (including children) in the very first mission, watching an execution of an Allied operative by firing squad in the third mission, and watching three of your superior officers assassinated right before your eyes.
- Given this kind of trend I was hoping RA2 to have more of the serious war tone, but that was not to be. It was also disappointing that the new features that Tiberian Sun had introduced (such as line of sight and ballistic physics actually applying to certain weapons, or how you still had to make silos to store your money--all of which made it a better game than its more popular brother Starcraft in my view) were gone, gone, gone. Westwood had also done nothing to stop the constant spamming of units that unbalanced both the original Command and Conquer, as well as Red Alert 1. RA2 was not a bad game, but I expected more from Westwood. Too bad it was the point where the classic Westwood died, which was a pity since Westwood was so much more than C&C. Ever heard of Lands of Lore, Nox, Emperor: Battle for Dune, Legend of Kyrandia, Earth and Beyond, or Eye of the Beholder? No? Then you're living proof, one among millions, of how EA thoroughly destroyed the soul of Westwood and turned it into a money farm for producing C&C and RA titles. --Mazryonh 02:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
- Totally agree with you. The first C&C and RA was still the best for me. For C&C, even though the number of units and gameplay is not as good as the later games, the storyline and the atomsphere was still the best of all. Kane actually tried to murder civilians and pin them on GDI. When he failed to do so, he just fabricated the story anyway...gotta love the story and the man.--Wildcards 13:48, 22 April 2011 (CDT)
Never played World in Conflict. .Now for me it was this arcade-y, less serious tone that made it my favorite. Besides I hated Tiberian Sun, it tried to be like Starcraft because all the AI would do is rush in the first five minutes of a match. But hey, your have your opinion and I have mine BeardedHoplite 23:39, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Now that you say that, i do remember the Dune games BeardedHoplite 14:34, 23 May 2010 (UTC)