Baboon said:
Rosh, with unit combinations I meant taking over an ememy's construction center and using it to build enemy buildings and unit types, which would automatically combine with your already available unit types. THAT was cool. I remember teleporting 10 crazy ivans into the enemy base.
So where does "innovative" and "fun" come into play? As with the "strategies" of C&C games, taking over your opponent's base is about the high point when the whole construction system is so goddamn short bus, it isn't even funny.
I don't care if it sucks compared to other RTS games (there aren't THAT many) I enjoyed it. Especially 8 player skirmish battles.
So if you like it, that makes it a great game, innovative, and fun. Next time, make sure you mention that appraisals are in context to your own preferences. I'm going by design.
calculon00 said:
Does anyone still play submarine titans? I can assure you that many people still play Red Alert 2 on a regular basis.
I know people who also prefer to play Homeworld and many other RTS titles that have since passed C&C's far outdated deisgn, while Westwood was publicly sucking themselves off about "innovating" frozen rivers. Sorry, kiddies, people can even make projectile launch height into account, and can figure out a resource system that isn't complete shit by relying on a drunken harvester driver.
Ok, I'll admit Westwood games are uninspired, and most of them are crap IMO, but Red Alert 2 isn't one of them.
Same crap LOS, same crap pathfinding, same everything. Red Alert 2 was just as uninspired shit as the rest of the "series".
Yuri's revenge DID contain a lot of original units.
Compared to the other crap expansions, yes, it did have a lot of uh..."original" units. So did the ones that had Tesla Troops/Dogs/Tanks, despite their original ability to be used in Red Alert 1, but you needed to know how to design better than the designers themselves as it took them more than another two years to come up with that and hype the shit out of it.
Compared to real expansions and better games, HELL NO.
Just because games like starcraft had bit of mind control in them doesn't mean you should discount the whole expansion. The fact is that the game is fun, and it doesn't have to blow away all other competition in all areas to do that. I found that the tiberian sun engine used in red alert 2 was original enough to give the game some credit here.
I discount the entire series because they do nothing but hype the same garbage and flawed systems while trying to claim some "innovation" that really isn't there at all. I think I have pointed out before in this thread, exhaustively, how C&C/Red Alert is really sucking hind titty in the RTS design aspect. The only reason it seems to be popular, to be fair, is because it is hyped a lot and receives a lot of publicity. The game used to be good. When it later turned into nothing but a mass of poor maps, poor units, poor LOS, poor building, poor EVERYTHING because the devs foolishly believed that they were the new RTS gods with Dune 2/C&C/RA rehashed ad nauseum, I tuned out the noise of the slurping sound of the developers sucking themselves off. After the hype is removed, there's little to Red Alert 2 that makes it comparatively worth playing to other titles out, even when it was released.
The problem is that TA and other RTS games have already kicked its ass before it was released, TA had a SHITLOAD over RA2, which made it obvious that the RA2 devs weren't even trying if they are going to claim to be so great and end up with a title that is so dull and plays like a unit/map pack you paid money for.
It all boils down to one important point.
If they shipped a unit editor, they would kill the series.
