CNC: 4 Announced

[R.O.A]

Link

EA officially announced the next C&C strategy game - Command & Conquer 4. According to the publisher, Command & Conquer 4 will introduce "a multitude of innovations to the to the classic fast and fluid Command & Conquer gameplay while retaining the core compulsions that fans have come to love over the series’ history. Introducing new class-based gameplay, mobile bases and persistent player progression throughout all game modes, Command & Conquer 4 offers players new, innovative and compelling strategic depth."

“Command & Conquer is a powerful franchise with an amazing 15-year legacy. We are thrilled to bring the dramatic Tiberium saga to a conclusion in Command & Conquer 4. This game is designed to give fans all the answers they’ve been looking for,” said Mike Glosecki, Lead Producer of Command & Conquer 4 at EA Los Angeles. “With its objective-based multiplayer mode, persistent player progression and all-in-one mobile base, players will experience Command & Conquer like never before.”

Here's more info:

The story of Command & Conquer 4 takes place after the events of the critically acclaimed Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars™. The year is 2062 and humanity is at the brink of extinction. With only six years left until the mysterious crystalline structure Tiberium renders the earth entirely uninhabitable, the two opposing factions – Global Defense Initiative (GDI) and the Brotherhood of Nod – inevitably find themselves in desperation for the same cause: to stop Tiberium from extinguishing mankind. The unthinkable becomes reality and Nod’s enigmatic leader Kane takes off for GDI headquarters. What is Kane planning in the heart of his enemies’ base? Command & Conquer 4 draws the epic conclusion to the beloved Tiberium universe, where fans will learn the fate of Earth, Nod, Tiberium, GDI and most importantly, Kane’s motivations behind his decade-long plan.

The first concept art for the game can be seen here.

In addition to the two campaigns on the epic battles of GDI and Nod, which players will get to conquer alone or in a cooperative mode, Command & Conquer 4 will also feature a new 5v5 objective-based multiplayer mode, "promoting teamwork and cooperation."

Command & Conquer 4 is being developed at EA Los Angeles and will ship to retailers in 2010 for the PC.

Well I am pleased to say the least, although I thought Generals would have the next installment.

[StarKillaz]

~ We are thrilled to bring the dramatic Tiberium saga to a conclusion in Command & Conquer 4 ~

Anybody else get the feeling that if this game does well enough in a year or so a Command & Conquer 5 will be made anyway.

[Darksider]

~ We are thrilled to bring the dramatic Tiberium saga to a conclusion in Command & Conquer 4 ~

Anybody else get the feeling that if this game does well enough in a year or so a Command & Conquer 5 will be made anyway.

It's fucking EA. This game is gonna have some kinda sequel hook regardless.

[PREDATOR490]

I'm sorry to say that despite being a rabid player of the first game on the Sega Satarn this dosent interested me much given the amount of shit the CNC genre has come out with recently. At best I can see them coming up with pretty cutscenes of nonsensical crap spewing from Kane which is supposed to explain whats been going on but probably wont and a bunch of known faces to attract some attention.

That said, I am highly doubt this is going to be the end of C&C. After Red Alert 3 they have opened new ground to completely fuck over C&C with an endless line of generic sequels that accomplish nothing except saturate idiots with pretty models and have none of the old charm that made C&C so popular to begin with.

[Andrew_Fireborn]

Link Introducing new class-based gameplay, mobile bases and persistent player progression

"Mobile bases don't bother me... but "Class-based" gameplay?... That sounds like a recipie for bad execution, even if the theory sounded palatable....

It might just end up being subfactions... but eh. RA3 was -shit-, and C&C3 wasn't much better, so I sincerely doubt I'll be buying it.

[Starglider]

It's fucking EA. This game is gonna have some kinda sequel hook regardless.

Not necessarily. They may simply reboot the continuity or make a whole new (but broadly similar) setting for the next game. Which would be for the best, I never liked C&C's setting anyway.

It might just end up being subfactions... but eh. RA3 was -shit-, and C&C3 wasn't much better, so I sincerely doubt I'll be buying it.

The fluff in RA3 was fun, but the gameplay was solely tactical rock-paper-scissors and unit micromanagement. The campaign was ok to play through but I was already getting bored despite blasting through it, and I can't imagine the multiplayer being any good. Even Warcraft 3 had more meaningful base design and planning over a horizon of more than three minutes - oh and more level variety and unit AI. Since C&C4 will probably be the RA3 with new models and cutscenes, I'm not optimistic.

[Nephtys]

CNC Generals Zero Hour was 'class' based in the sense of 'ARTILLERY GENERAL', 'AIR FORCE GENERAL', even if executed like garbage.

However, the Shockwave Mod really isn't that bad. If they can make variety work like that for CNC4, I'd be impressed. Since CNC3's sub-factions were idiotic and underwhelming. Oh no! ZOCOM gets ONE WHOLE NEW (useless) Infantry model that... replaces the better original? And loses half it's tanks? How fantastic.

[Oskuro]

Every single line from that press release makes me cringe. Can't they let C&C's corpse rot in peace? Oh wait, EA, gaming industry's top necrophiles.

[Narkis]

Hey, as long as they make money... The people who buy this crap are more to blame than those who make it.

[Losonti Tokash]

Link Introducing new class-based gameplay, mobile bases and persistent player progression

"Mobile bases don't bother me... but "Class-based" gameplay?... That sounds like a recipie for bad execution, even if the theory sounded palatable....

It might just end up being subfactions... but eh. RA3 was -shit-, and C&C3 wasn't much better, so I sincerely doubt I'll be buying it.

Yeah, class based multi is pretty shitty which is exactly why World in Conflict was one of the worst multi strategy games in recent memory.

oh wait

[erik_t]

The fluff in RA3 was fun, but the gameplay was solely tactical rock-paper-scissors and unit micromanagement. The campaign was ok to play through but I was already getting bored despite blasting through it, and I can't imagine the multiplayer being any good. Even Warcraft 3 had more meaningful base design and planning over a horizon of more than three minutes - oh and more level variety and unit AI. Since C&C4 will probably be the RA3 with new models and cutscenes, I'm not optimistic.

I never saw RA3 in person but I'm reading about it on the wiki now... is the micro truly as awful as I'm fearing!? Every damned unit seems to have about four special abilities.

[Nephtys]

RA3 is unplayably bad. It has buttons for such stupid crap as using secondary weapons! So you need to hit a toggle for your vehicle to engage air units (and lose anti-ground ability) or engage ground units (and lose anti-air). This is even worse for the Empire of RoboJapan, who has a button to turn their AA tanks into... flying ground attack copters?

The micro is atrocious and has no benefit to strategy or tactics, just twitch management of abilities the AI should have built in. The few fun abilities such as the man-cannon is alright for a special function button, but practically EVERYTHING either just relies on it or has a useless flavor ability.

[Andrew_Fireborn]

Yeah, class based multi is pretty shitty which is exactly why World in Conflict was one of the worst multi strategy games in recent memory.

oh wait

Having not played WiC or Company of Heroes (which my vent had been playing up until recently) I know that Class/specialization based game play can work, and work well in multiplayer. Honestly, I'd have less of a visceral reaction to the phrase is I thought it would be real specialization and team interdependence. But this is EA, and this is likely the same team that made RA3 & C&C3. Hope, with that track record, would be a wasted effort.

[Companion Cube]

Look, it's some uninspiring concept art! Why are they so bad at this? Remember the early design of C&C3's Zone Trooper? It was a guy with dislocated shoulders wearing an American football helmet.

[Nephtys]

Look, it's some uninspiring concept art! Why are they so bad at this? Remember the early design of C&C3's Zone Trooper? It was a guy with dislocated shoulders wearing an American football helmet.

Oh good, I was afraid they were going to make a CNC game without a VTOL transport or any tanks. Yawn. These look like just alternate versions of regular CNC3 stuff.

I have a fear that this vaunted 'mobile base' will just be a 'Your barracks can take off and fly at horribly slow speeds!' sorta deal. Which sounds awfully familiar.

[Andrew_Fireborn]

Look, it's some uninspiring concept art! Why are they so bad at this? Remember the early design of C&C3's Zone Trooper? It was a guy with dislocated shoulders wearing an American football helmet.

Oh good, I was afraid they were going to make a CNC game without a VTOL transport or any tanks. Yawn. These look like just alternate versions of regular CNC3 stuff.

I have a fear that this vaunted 'mobile base' will just be a 'Your barracks can take off and fly at horribly slow speeds!' sorta deal. Which sounds awfully familiar.

Actually, I'm betting that huge VTOL there will -be- the base. Maybe as a flying ConYard if not a self contained Battlegroup/C^3/Production Facility.

[Starglider]

I have a fear that this vaunted 'mobile base' will just be a 'Your barracks can take off and fly at horribly slow speeds!' sorta deal. Which sounds awfully familiar.

I have never understood what this was supposed to add to the game, even in Starcraft. It just decreases the need to actually pay attention to the terrain and set up a defensible position. Not that this would've mattered in RA3 even if the bases hadn't been mobile, since two thirds of the units could swim, a good third of them could fly and impassable terrain was very rare.

[Prannon]

I have a fear that this vaunted 'mobile base' will just be a 'Your barracks can take off and fly at horribly slow speeds!' sorta deal. Which sounds awfully familiar.

I have never understood what this was supposed to add to the game, even in Starcraft. It just decreases the need to actually pay attention to the terrain and set up a defensible position. Not that this would've mattered in RA3 even if the bases hadn't been mobile, since two thirds of the units could swim, a good third of them could fly and impassable terrain was very rare.

I've seen some crazy starcraft games where it actually did matter. One terran actually lifted all of his factories into the air and relocated his main base twice. Ended up losing anyway, but it was still awfully close. Also, some terrans use redundant buildings that can lift off as very durable scouters.

No way to know whether any of those things will have the same uses in CnC4, but one thing I would say for sure is that it will definitely make the game a little more fluid, plus if you make a mistake in building your base, all you have to do is move the building a little and place it where you want. Problem solved.

[Starglider]

I have never understood what this was supposed to add to the game, even in Starcraft.

I've seen some crazy starcraft games where it actually did matter.

I don't mean in terms of 'is useful to the players', although it's pretty damning that most players and most games don't even bother to use the capability, I mean 'how does it make the gameplay more interesting'. IMHO it makes it less interesting, because terrain becomes even less relevant than it already is in modern RTSes.

No way to know whether any of those things will have the same uses in CnC4, but one thing I would say for sure is that it will definitely make the game a little more fluid

RA3 is already too fluid, to the extent that planning, maneuver and static defenses are almost meaningless. RA3 exists in some kind of compressed hyper-time where the only really relevant factors are guessing what units your enemy will build so that you can bring the appropriate counter, and being able to micromanage 20 or so units into using appropriate attacks, staying at appropriate range, withdrawing when they start to take damage etc etc.

plus if you make a mistake in building your base, all you have to do is move the building a little and place it where you want. Problem solved.

Which would make skill in base building less relevant... if there was any skill in base layout left in RA3 anyway, which there isn't.

[Laughing Mechanicus]

I have a fear that this vaunted 'mobile base' will just be a 'Your barracks can take off and fly at horribly slow speeds!' sorta deal. Which sounds awfully familiar.

Staggeringly enough, they didn't even have the imagination to do that - by the looks of this screenshot the "mobile bases" are just completely stupid looking Supreme Commander wannabe mechs. That they would release a screenshot that awful just beggars belief, it just looks like something from a run-of-the-mill C&C3 mod.

I would actually like to see, dare I say it, a reboot of the Tiberium franchise with a game set in modern times that concentrates on showing the struggle between GDI and Nod as the kind of terrorist war it was originally. Use a campaign map like Tiberian Dawn had, but make it much more interactive - so the player can use it to deploy his forces, perform research etc... before missions. When it comes to missions themselves GDI would need to justify its budget by pushing Nod influence in third world areas back/not napalming Bialystock and Nod would have to use subterfuge and propaganda to win support and undermine GDI. On top of all this you can show the steady spread of Tiberium - perhaps have the game start immediately after it lands and how both sides trying to understand it.

[Stark]

Best part about that screenshot: landramps between two elevations. INNOVATION.

At least WiC will still be the best looking RTS.

[Uraniun235]

Wow, what the hell is with the ramp? That's so intensely lazy.

I can't help but get an "Emperor: Battle for Dune" vibe off that screenshot.

EDIT: also lol is that a Mammoth Mk 2 I see?

[Andrew_Fireborn]

Yeah, looks like two of them on either side of that... whatever it is.

*snip*

So... you want to make C&C: Enemy Unknown?

[Nephtys]

Best part about that screenshot: landramps between two elevations. INNOVATION.

At least WiC will still be the best looking RTS.

That's the damned RA3 engine. It's ugly as hell unless you max out the settings, which then it's merely passable. Disgusting, EA. Really now. It even looks like they just reskinned CNC3 landscapes and units, threw on some new glow and called it a day.

Zero expectations here. It's going to be the same shit, new skin, $59.99 and steadily becoming more and more unplayable. I mean, RA2 and CNC3 weren't bad, just balanced like crap. RA3 is terrible twitchRTS Korean cyborg garbage with zero balance, and this looks like more of the same.

[Laughing Mechanicus]

Something that occurs to me is that the style of the unit design for both GDI and Nod in that screenshot is very reminiscent of the (awful) unit designs from the CnC3 expansion pack, and that was actually farmed out to different developer than CnC3 itself. It wouldn't surprise me if that developer has been given the task of doing CnC4, while the studio that worked on RA3 works on something else - there are rumors and hints about a sequel to C&C Generals bubbling up quite often recently.