A lot of that will come with practice, after we've gotten a better handle on these new tech trees. I expect the first time people jump in to play the new and improved Zerg in Heart of The Swarm will be almost as much of a shock to the system.
You could say the same of StarCraft 2, though. I mean it’s something I could learn over time, but I think C&C is going to need a damn good tutorial if they want to make it as mass appeal as its price tag.ĭan: This is definitely a fast, micro-management-heavy RTS, just like mom used to make. Just trying to remember which buildings build what, not to mention trying to figure out which units are good counters to the enemies’, is a lot to take in on top of managing two resources. There’s just so much to manage! Even when you want to tier up your technology you have to build new buildings instead of just doing research in ones you currently own. It’s a bit intimidating how fast things ramp up from starting with a single structure to a sprawling military base. Less than a minute into a match it felt absolutely necessary to start hunting down a second base to start securing oil and supply depots. Anthony: Yeah, aggressive expansion and base-building definitely feel key to victory in C&C.
And the EU has to build power plants that function not like old-school C&C power, but like StarCraft's Protoss pylons. The EU, for example, send helicopters to extract resources from stockpiles, while the GLA sends dudes with wheelbarrows and pickaxes. For example, we got to play as the European Union faction and the GLA terrorist faction (but not the Asian faction, the APA), and the two played very differently. Plus, there's a noticeable StarCraft influence here, because Victory is making an effort to differentiate the factions more than in Generals. For one thing, it's now a two-resource economy with money and oil, instead of just money in the original. But in some major ways it's very different, too.
#COMMAND AND CONQUER GENERALS 2 FREE PLAY SERIES#
For someone who’s played the series for years, did it strike you as immediately familiar? Dan: Sure - I mean, I haven't had the opportunity to push a button that said "Build Terrorist" since the original, and it definitely shares the same visual style. You have what boils down to the same three factions, complete with bomb-making terrorists who’ll use chemical weapons at the drop of the hat. I mean, I think it’s great for long-time fans that they’re basically sticking to core of Generals. I don’t have as much experience with the franchise as you do. And this new version of C&C is all about the tank rush. There’s a place for both, though, and there’s definitely still a crowd out there that appreciates a good tank rush.
#COMMAND AND CONQUER GENERALS 2 FREE PLAY PC#
Dan Stapleton, IGN's PC God: Old-school RTS is still as much fun as ever! But yeah, it’s very different from what we’ve been used to these past few years, especially if you prefer the slower-paced, small unit group tactics of something like Company of Heroes. It feels so different from what I’m used to, but I’m not sure if I like it. You create hordes of units and send them to a swift death, only to churn out more. Command & Conquer is decidedly and unapologetically old-school. To be completely honest, I’ve never played the original Generals, and in the years since its release I feel like the RTS has changed a lot. We’ve played Command & Conquer – let IGN’s Dan Stapleton and Anthony Gallegos tell you about what’s next for the franchise.Īnthony Gallegos, Editor: I don’t know if it’s just me, Dan, but I walked away from the demo wondering if I’m missing a certain nostalgia factor to make me appreciate Command & Conquer more. We’ve seen buildings crumble and mighty tanks turned into twisted, flaming metal.
We’ve commanded squadrons of fighters and led legions of men to their doom. But for now, it's all Generals all the time, and we got to try out two modes - pure 1v1 and 2v2 deathmatch, and a two-player co-op holdout mode - and two factions.
0 kommentar(er)
