Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Command and Conquer Generals 122

Posted by michael from the mind-controlled-squid dept.
Kevin Tomaya writes: "GameSpot has posted a really in-depth story about a brand new Command and Conquer game that is in all 3D. It's called C&C Generals and has the US and China fighting against a terrorist organization. The article is like that Metal Gear Solid 2 story they did last year. It takes you through the whole genesis of the project and introduces the development team."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Command and Conquer Generals More

Command and Conquer Generals

Comments Filter:
  • Looks good graphically, but I was kind of disappointed that they didn't seem to have any wacky, over-the-top units, like psychics and mind-controlled squid. It gave the Red Alert games a sense of fun that I think is missing in a lot of games.

    By the way, be sure to check gamespot again monday afternoon, they'll have more on Generals, including a list of some of the units!
  • Is in coming this close to the 'real world', and still imagining good guys and bad guys. They don't really exist, especially in times of war, as history will tell you as often as you please. Still, it's twenty years in the future, so we can dream, right?

  • In Depth? (Score:5, Funny)

    by nzhavok ( 254960 ) on Saturday March 09, 2002 @09:03AM (#3134619) Homepage
    Well that certainly was a very in-depth article, at least it didn't leave me wondering if the powerpoint presentations had bullet points or not.

    The prospect of a new and better C&C frightens me, I remember how addicted I was to C&C and RA. The addiction was only partially staved of by a little bit of StarCraft and Total Annihilation. I'd just come to terms with the fact I was probably going to lose 6 months of my life from Warcraft III they tell me there's another C&C coming along. Well I suppose the only hope for me is that it'll follow in the footsteps of Tiberian Sun.

    • Re:In Depth? (Score:1, Insightful)

      by mobets ( 101759 )
      Hopefully they've improved the AI as much as they improved the graphics. I realy hated having the computers hit my power plants w/ the big laser when they hadn't even had a unit near my base. And then the fact that they don't seem to have to search for me, they just know where I am...
  • at first quick glance i read "US and china fighting against each other"...

    wonder what hell the world will become when THAT happens ;-p

  • Credit to game programmers (Score:4, Insightful)

    by QuantumG ( 50515 ) <qg@biodome.org> on Saturday March 09, 2002 @09:36AM (#3134649) Homepage Journal
    I used to think it was terrible the way games programmers never got any credit. You'd play a game and about the only indication there was that Activision didn't write it was one little spash screen at the start. Movies start with credits and nifty spash screens that make a big deal out of the actors, the director, even the people who write the music but games are generally considered to be a product of the distributor by most. Then an article like this comes along and you really can see why that is. Those head shots of the programmers should be reason enough to lock them in a basement and feed them caffine up and until the game is on the shelves and then get them another project, quick!
    • C&C has some of the best installers and opening scenes ever, with C&C Renegade being no exception. It's really good at getting you in the mood of the game.

      GTA and GTA2 (GTA3 hasn't been ported to the PC yet..) also has good openings.
      • I like their installers as well, except what's the point? Everything animates and takes forever - I'd rather pick a directory, minimize it, and browse the web anyway while it installs. Although nice, it just seems silly - a normal InstallShield or new MSI-style installer would work just as well.
    • While I agree it's nice to see the development teams get some credit here, note that the only people mentioned in the article are the producers, and they seem to get the credit for 'doing' the game most of the time. Not one mention of the programmer who prototyped that wireframe engine in just a few days, or the artists responsible for the stellar terrain.

      But, then again, it's hard to credit every member of a team, and it's a lot more sympathetic to associate a product with one or two quirky individuals rather than 20 or 30. Still, it's distressing to see the efforts of an entire team reduced to one person's efforts. Plight of the engineer, I suppose...

      • Re:Credit to game programmers (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Geoff Keighley ( 565470 ) on Saturday March 09, 2002 @11:54PM (#3136714)
        As the author of the article I wanted to briefly comment on this post. I certainly try to give credit where credit is due -- In the case of the C&C Generals article, I ended up interviewing about 12 people on the team of 40. Not 100% of the team, but keep in mind that 40 is a pretty large team. On a smaller project like Black & White (team of about 12 key people) it's easier to speak with everyone.

        Most of the key people were interviewed and shown in photos, even if they weren't the main focus of the story. (i.e. the terrain was created by Todd Williams, who is quoted in the story and his picture is shown). Keep in mind that I'm not always given access to everyone on a game development team. When I was in Tokyo for Metal Gear Solid 2, I was only allowed to speak with the most senior people on the team, all programmers/designers/artists who had worked with Mr. Kojima for over a decade. Companies aren't always willing to put every employee in front of the press.

        However, I would like to say that I've failed with the article if you feel I've reduced the "efforts of an entire team...to one person's efforts." Yes, Skaggs and Bonin are quoted frequently, but that is to maintain some consistency throughout the piece. As a narrative endeavor I have to have some common themes running through the story, and after all, Skaggs and Bonin are the heads of the project. Yet I also tried very hard to at least recognize the efforts of the other key individuals on the team, such as Alhquist (game editor) and all the designers, key artists, etc.

        Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
  • It's nice to see China and the US working together against terrorism in this game. It's a more realistic scenario than the ones that pit US and Chinese forces (including the wargames on this scenario conducted by the US armed forces).

    Actually, China is claiming to be fighting the war against terror in its repression of the Uighur ethnic Turk Muslim people in its Xinjiang province, on the basis that a few dozen people from there may have trained in Afghan Al Qaeda terrorist camps.

    • Actually, China is claiming to be fighting the war against terror in its repression of the Uighur ethnic Turk Muslim people in its Xinjiang province, on the basis that a few dozen people from there may have trained in Afghan Al Qaeda terrorist camps.

      Tibet, anyone? Maybe they should have a game where Chinese Su-27's get chased and harassed by flying lotus-postured monks.

    • It's a more realistic scenario than the ones that pit US and Chinese forces (including the wargames on this scenario conducted by the US armed forces).

      Is It? [latimes.com]

      The secret report, which was provided to Congress on Jan. 8, says the Pentagon needs to be prepared to use nuclear weapons against
      China, Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria. It says the weapons could be used in three types of situations: against targets able to withstand nonnuclear attack; in retaliation for attack with nuclear, biological or chemical weapons; or "in the event of surprising military developments.
  • Sounds like an interesting game, I just hope it's better than C&C Renegade... all the reviews for Renegade have been mediochre at best. good try, just poor execution.

    C&C Generals uses the same basic engine but it's cool to see them trying to reflect current events in a video game. Maybe the media will portray the people playing it as "training for the fight against terrorism".. well ok, not likely. =)

  • Excellent game. (Score:3, Troll)

    by Steven_Wostoen ( 564849 ) on Saturday March 09, 2002 @10:23AM (#3134698) Homepage

    I was invited over for a sneak-preview earlier this year by Mark Skaggs, and I'll tell you one thing: the rotation potential (of the 3D) graphics on this game, especially the scenery, is two generations of anything currently available on the market.

    A lot of thought has also been put into the units and plot of the game, it hasn't been an ad-hoc composition of cliched parts as many games in the last few years have been in terms of storyline/plot.

    The C&C Generals team are really friendly guys, and work in a relaxed atmosphere, which is important in any game production unit. I'll have to give a thumbs up to this game, and highly recommend it. The guys have worked hard on it and deserve success with it. Unfortuantely I have a feeling that the User interface won't go down extremely well with most consumers, but I understand them trying to break away from the traditional style of UI driving.

    Anyway, it should be a cracker of a game.
    • it hasn't been an ad-hoc composition of cliched parts as many games in the last few years have been in terms of storyline/plot.

      *cough*maxpayne*cough*

      • Sure, let's mention a game with incredible graphics, fun weapons, and cool bullet-time effects. Most cliched last year would have to be maybe .. hmm .. Return to Castle Wolfenstein, perhaps? Besides having a synonym of "retread" and "rehash" right there in the title, the models just look incredibly blocky. Compare something simple, like Max Payne furniture and RtCW's - Payne's looks real, while the latter looks like slapped together rectangular shapes. Oh, I'm also happy that RtCW finally got the idea of having multiple weapons assigned to the same key/category - that was innovative when Half-Life did that in 1998. Out of all the games last year, you can find much better targets to pick on than Max Payne.
    • It'll take alot for me to believe it's a couple of generations ahead of Machines due to 3d graphics.

      Even TA did a rather good job in its time, it's just too bad they didn't have a better AI.

      • It'll take alot for me to believe it's a couple of generations ahead of Machines due to 3d graphics.

        Machines graphics are very good, but what I was referring to wasn't the quality of the images themselves, but rather the rotation potential of the split-time rendering of the surface textures. The reason that C&C Generals graphics will be two generations ahead of anything else in the market, including Acclaim's Machines, is that speed and reaction time of the back-objects inserted into the graphics framework, which allow dynamic postproduction using built-in "back-object 3D hooks". This, opposed to the static postproduction and use of traditional scripting within external modelling tools, makes C&C Generals graphics look a lot more responsive, cleaner, and more realistic, if a bit more resource intensive.
    • I was invited over for a sneak-preview earlier this year by Mark Skaggs, and I'll tell you one thing: the rotation potential (of the 3D) graphics on this game, especially the scenery, is two generations of anything currently available on the market.

      I'd hope it was at least two generations ahead, as that's probably how long it'll take before we see the game ;-).

    • (With apologies to Goats [amazon.com])

      Folks this magnificent troll is actually a reincarnation (probably the same person, given that the quality is about the same) of this [slashdot.org] one. Moderators, p-p-p-please mod this accordingly. Its embarrassing to see this at the top of the comments.

  • Great article, if not a bit long. But great, I'm impressed with Skaggs and his team, with the awesome graphics of C&C:G - This might be the RTS game that brings me back to the genre that I left so long ago in favor of 3D FPS games!
    I can't wait to go buy it! I just hope that they won't mind emulation servers ;) Blizzard blowz!

  • Great Game (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by Bender Unit 22 ( 216955 )
    I have been playing it since it came out, and was once in the top 50 of all players, but since I do have a life, it was hard to maintain.(that and the problems with the ranking system causing it to be reset at least once)

    No Linux.
    Right now there is, in my view, a major showstopper and that is the lack of a linux version of the server.
    Right now you either has to install the full game or obtain a special server version from Westwood. But still on Windows. If they want this to catch on, they really need to port the server to Linux.

    Little Information.
    The information for setting up a server is hard to come by. Granted, this is a new game, but if there is one thing that they should know by now by watching other popular games is that if it must survive they need a good batch of fast access servers available on the net. Making it Windows only and no really helpful information for people who wants to set up a server does not help them. In the real world, game admins does not have unlimited time to figure out how to setup a dedicated server that runs well. When your day is booked full with users screaming, the ones that screams for a c&c server will be but further down the queue because the time needed to satisfy them could(and will) be used to help 4 times as many.
    There has also been some people running these server claiming that it uses a lot of bandwidth, a lot more than your everyday FPS, but I can't confirm this since the no Linux issue has prevented me from setting up servers for public use. I am sorry but there is no way that we are intalling Windows servers. The game servers many places does, for some reason, not get the attention and money they should so getting the hardware and software is a matter of begging for it, collecting bits and parts And with a non-exising budget the begging credits won't be used for Windows licences :-)

    • Wake up! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by NDPTAL85 ( 260093 )
      1. Generals isn't out yet so wtf are you talking about.

      2. " If they want this to catch on, they really need to port the server to Linux." Are you one of those folks who are so deluded that you actually think there is a large Linux gaming market out there?
      • 1. Generals isn't out yet so wtf are you talking about.
        2. " If they want this to catch on, they really need to port the server to Linux." Are you one of those folks who are so deluded that you actually think there is a large Linux gaming market out there?

        He specifically stated that he was talking about the porting the server not the client. It's even right there in the snippet that you quoted. So what is with your vicious knee-jerk reaction against his comment?

        If you don't understand what clients and servers are, don't be too embarassed to ask. That would be better than flaming someone for making a comment that goes over your head.

  • Westwood and Gamespot fake screenshots (Score:3, Interesting)

    by SMN ( 33356 ) on Saturday March 09, 2002 @12:00PM (#3134890)
    I hate to break it to you, but Westwood has a history of faking development screenshots and lying about what features have already been implemented. They did it for Tiberian Sun and they did it for Renegade, and all of the gaming magazines and websites (including Gamespot) will happily fall for it when they get a chance to have "exclusive" news. And the poor saps reading this probably won't realize they've been duped until it takes 4 years for the game to come out (Renegade) or the final version of the game has inferior graphics and fewer features than the article says WW has _already_ developed (Tiberian Sun). I'll believe this when I see it.
    • The screenshots are real, we've seen the game running and actually will have some video footage to post in the coming weeks. I agree the team has a lot of work ahead of them to make a 2002 release, but the screenshots definitely aren't photoshopped.
      • As much as I'd like to believe you -- you appear to be the article's author, although there's always the chance that you're a troll imposter =) -- we've heard that same exact line about Westwood games too many times before. The first articles about Tiberian Sun and Renegade both swore that the magazines/websites had seen the game running and that they were actual screenshots -- and those were all lies. The later excuse was that the screenshots were created to "match the features we expected to be in the final product," but that goes against everything the early previews said.

        And do I trust GameSpot? While I don't know offhand how often GameSpot has written articles using doctored screenshots, I do know that GameSpot acquired GameCenter. GameCenter was the first site to have a preview of SimCity 3000 (must have been a long time ago now), and they were proudly showing off a whole bunch of screenshots of a full-3d SimCity and writing about how beautiful it truly was. A few weeks later, Maxis backpedaled and announced that SC3k would only be 2d -- they admitted that a fully 3d simcity was beyond the capabilities of current hardware, even the top-of-the-line dual Pentium Pro 200s (I ran a very popular fan site - may it RIP - and received a copy of that official announcement from Aimee Howe at Maxis, back in February 98). So if Maxis says it won't run on their hardware, how could GameCenter claim that Maxis came to their office and ran it on their computers? In fact, the article had a whole page on whatever tech Maxis supposedly developed to make the 3d possible by scaling the amount of detail to the hardware capability. The answer is simple -- GameCenter, like so many other game-hype-publications, outright lied to its readers. So while the reasons I'm doubtful here are purely circumstantial, I've seen this total lack of integrity among simial publications too often to fall for it again.

  • The formula is getting a bit old (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I hope there actually is some new ideas added to the RTS genre, because it has been getting really old now - Red Alert 2 was basically like all the other C&C games (plus better graphics).

    What I really want to see out of RTS games is full 3D movement (moving in a 3D space). The control system has to be good for this, and others have tried and failed before. I really hope the C&C people can actually do something innovative and advance the genre, rather than having RTS' bogged down by terrible clone games.


    OT bit: If anybody is living in the UK and is interested in open source you should remember this Slashdot article [slashdot.org] on a consultation for the use of open-source in the UK government. If you have any constructive comments read the Slashdot page, and read the linked articles and comment: the more opinion the better
  • If anyone remembers, and if I can recall correctly, this started with a story they did on Black and White. I loved the piece they did on B&W. It not only told a lot about the game but also about what exactly goes on behind the scenes. The 3D model, the music, the graphics, artwork, debugging and so on.

    I think that was by far the most entertaining of all. So much so that after I read the article, the next day I bought the game. First reason was that I wanted to see how B&W played and second was that I wanted to support the developers' hard work. And it was well worth it.

    These articles give an in-depth view of the development process so you can relate to it and hopefully come to appreciate the game even better. I hope they keep doing it.

  • Am I the only one who misread that as "Command and Conquer Genitals?" I was expecticing some bizare comic version where you conquer STDsss
  • I've been a fan of C&C games since the start, but I was slightly disappointed with Red Alert 2. Here you have a great game with great units until you can start building mind controlled dolphins and squids! I'm sorry but I'm surprised that the developer that created these units didn't get laughed out of the design meeting. The secret is, either keep the game moderatedly realistic, or don't. The first C&C game was great because most of the units were realistic, and then there were a couple of units that were just a little far fetched (cloking tank, Ion cannon). Instead of using these so called fantasy units, why don't they focus on some new weapons that we might actually see in the future? For example: Star Wars, Missle Defence, etc. But I also enjoy the so called "fantasy" games like Starcraft, but here they didn't incorporate any realisim into the game. So Westwood, please do us a favor and do one or the other, but don't do both!
    • I thought the reason C&C was great was because of the far-out units. Pile 5 engineers into an APC, drive the APC over some crates until it becomes cloaked, then skate into the enemy base unseen with 5 engineers. Sell all the buildings and you win.

      At least, that's the main strategy I usually employed.

      • You might as well play Starcraft... I'd prefer not to have those "tricky tricks" that fly in the face of the spirit of the game... sure I can surround everything by dogs, but that is just a cheap ploy to use a sneak attack- and it only works against a newbie.

        As the "typical" (according to some article I can't believe) gamer, I'm a married male who doesn't have the rest of my life to learn all the crazy, arcane strengths and liabilities of all the odd units... kind of like playing a Mortal Combat type game where the six-fingered mutants are able to crush you with all the arcane button-move combinations that I can't even remember when I need them...

        I'd STILL prefer the RTS genre to be more of an animated chess (or go) game than the brute-force ass-bangs I usually see in online play... and I could care less about playing the AI.

        I'd prefer a "sense" of realism over anything, whether it be realism of unit strength, or "physical" size of units, or whatever- but I don't want real time waits (ie. three months to receive new units). Sure these games are set in the future, and sure, they are just games... and I don't want something so dull as MS' overly realistic forray into RTS games... whatever that thing was called (with each players' morale meters).

        What I like about CC is that it is a campaign game... I'm not a fan of first-person shootups (face your enemy, no aiming required... you'll hit 'em). I'd rather see a game where I can choose my level of participation, toggle between different units, set up the attack, then participate first person in a chosen unit. I doubt with the thousands of units that end up in a large campaign that this is even possible, but it would certainly add a different dimension to the game.

        And promo screen shots always look worlds beyond what I see in actual gameplay...

  • Pics like this one [gamespot.com] show off the great HO-looking gameplay. This is actualy why I did a little model train stuff as a kid (never got into it seriously). It was so I could pretend to blow things up, fight wars, etc.

  • This game is being rushed. (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    After reading the entire article, they keep bringing about the point that they are tyring to RUSH this game out the door before the end of the year.

    This Scares Me.

    Imbalances, Almost zero beta testing time. Sure they got the engine, but with a TIGHT design schedule, i'm expecting nothing reveloutionary for the C&C series besides the graphics overhaul.

    With there tight pressed schedule they even said they couldent fit in some of the stuff they wanted to, so what would make this game any different than any other C&C game besides the graphics overhaul?

    I'm skeptic.
  • Apparently, Westwood has given up on the Tiberian Sun Series. C&C was Dawn, then Tiberian sun, and C&C 3 would have been twilight.

    IMHO, I thought the idea of alien (?) lifeforms and cool technology far more interesting than an alternate past or future (Red Alert et al). The titans, MLRS's and such were much cooler units too. RA2 was fun, but the AI was the real problem. Too Predictable. But since killing terrorists is en vogue, it'll definitely sell.

  • "...and it will be shipping for Mac OS X a month before being released for the PC."

    This are great news!

    PPA, the girl next door.

  • Did anyone ever play Ground Control? IMO that's the definitive 3-D RTS game right there. Features:

    1) Tactical advantage for operating in shadows
    2) Tactical advantage for being situated at higher elevations
    3) Damage bonus for flanking
    4) Intuitive waypoint system with no limit on # of waypoints (GREATLY reduced the amount of multitasking you had to do)
    5) Stable formations. Units remain in same position relative to other units even if you move the formation.
    5) No building or resource collecting (just how realistic is it to build war factories over the duration of a single battle, anyway?)
    6) Surviving units gain experience, hence perform more better in subsequent battles (faster movement, improved accuracy, inflict greater damage, etc.)
    7) Advanced squad AI. A range of tactics to choose from, as in Homeworld.

    Quite honestly, I don't see what all the hubbub over the new C&C is about. I also think it's downright inappropriate to be able to play the terrorists. At a time when we really ought to be respecting our soldiers, we're going to be playing a game where we can just click on them and order them dead? Deriving enjoyment out of such a thing makes me sick.

Slashdot Top Deals

Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.

Close