13 replies to this topic

[Amdrial]

Okay, this is going to be one hell of a post, and I'll probably make it a few posts long, beware that I'm just copypasting it's content directly here, so don't hit me at the back of my head with a fryingpan yelling: ''OMG WTF U STOELS HEXX'S WRITUP!''.

Page 1:

Introduction

Comrades, welcome, welcome! Come in from the blistering Canuckistani cold and sit down next to the warm fire; sit down, and listen to Comrade HeXetic tell you all about the next game in the Command & Conquer series: Red Alert 3!

Me and trips to visit Westwood & EA have an interesting history. I first started here at PCNC in the fall of 2001, as a humble files reviewer guy. That December, Westwood wanted PCNC to send someone down to preview Renegade and, incredibly, nobody else could go -- they either had school, or work, or no passport. So I got sent, tried the game I'd only barely heard about, did the writeup, and then got invited back in February for the launch party.



Since then I've been brought down to EA another five times, which is pretty incredible if you think about it -- how are they not totally sick of me yet?

Regardless, trip number 7 sent me to preview Red Alert 3. I hope I put in a good effort to give EA the feedback they need and you guys the info you want. This article is but one of four pieces I'm composing on the summit experience; in addition to this write-up and the almost 350 photos I took, I'll have another write-up coming in July (see the next section), and, of course, a video.

The embargo on much, but not all of the information I learned is now expired, so by all means, if I haven't answered a question in this article (or if you can't find the answer), then feel free to ask in the comments thread or on our new Red Alert 3 forum.

-----------------

But speaking of embargos...
What I Can't Tell You (Yet)

Unfortunately, we did not learn anything at the summit about the campaign or the cutscenes, so I can't tell you a single thing about them, because I know nothing. Believe me when I say I wish I had something to tell you, because I myself am totally a campaign and skirmish guy. We'll all just have to wait.

But that's not the only thing that I can't talk about. Because of EA's plans for E3 unveilings, there is a second embargo on information about Japan and also anything we learned from playing the game.

I know you're grumbling already -- I certainly took a lot of questions about Japan into the summit, and we did spend a fair amount of time playing the game in skirmish and multiplayer modes -- but unfortunately I can't tell you about them until mid-July or the public beta, whichever comes first. Rest assured I am already preparing my article about those two things so that the minute Apoc says "go", I'll be gone.

So, once again, apologies for the omissions, but from what my 12 pages of notes look like, there's a lot of information I can tell you without crossing EA's boundaries!

-----------------

Day 1

With a hearty breakfast under our (now-loosened) belts, it was time to begin. Day 1 kicked off with a number of presentations, the contents of which I'll be bringing to you in their own sections.
Design

First up was Executive Producer Chris Corry, who gave us a quick run-down on the game and its design. At the time of our visit, the team was pushing hard to make their "Alpha" release -- "Alpha" in game development terms is defined as the game being "feature-complete" and basically playable end-to-end with no huge chunks missing or colossal crashes.

Chris Corry said the emphasis for RA3 gameplay is on "force composition plus micromanagement", meaning that you win by having the right selection of units and putting the most effort into controlling smaller squads of them, rather than the emphasis being primarily on territory control (like in Company of Heroes) or on strategic warfare using huge numbers of units (like in Supreme Commander).

With respect to the campaign, EA feels that time travel is a key plot device in Red Alert series, which is why they felt RA3 should start off with one -- if you didn't already know, the premise of the game is that the Soviets travel back in time to assassinate Einstein, with the intent of being able to take over the world without having to deal with his meddling Chronosphere, Mirage technology, Prism technology, Gap generators, etc., etc...

Aside: As a matter of fact, Prism Cannons (the defensive tower) are in Red Alert 3 -- but they're called Spectrum Cannons, because, you know, Einstein is dead and couldn't invent Prism tech. In a later presentation, Greg Black explained that although, yeah, it is a bit of a hole, the operational mechanic for Prism Cannons (the way they supplement each other) was too cool to leave out.

Back to the campaign, there's going to be about 60 minutes of High-Definition video cutscenes and cinematics, so there's definitely quantity in terms of video -- don't fear another Generals! As previously announced, the campaign is essentially co-operative, and when you play through it alone you will actually be playing with another AI-controlled general, to whom you can give basic orders. You can even pick which general you play with, and completing special bonus objectives may unlock new generals, which will have different personalities and/or abilities.

On the multiplayer side, we've seen the new resource system, which is basically a refinement of the one in Generals. EA felt the problem with C&C3's Tiberium fields was that matches too often boiled down not to who could control the most number of fields, but rather who could slap down more refineries and pump out more harvesters to gather tons of money fast from their starting field(s). The "resource node" system, with its highly controlled income rate -- assuming you place your collection building right in front of it, you only need one truck for maximum cash flow -- means that gameplay should be more about controlling resource nodes across the map rather than simply trying to get the most income from your starting nodes. Also note that these nodes never completely expire -- like the Vespene Geysers in Starcraft, when they're empty they still give a minimal amount of cash (about 25% of the original rate, currently).

Many, if not most, units in Red Alert 3 are amphibious, and this is reflected in a big way in Red Alert 3. Chris Corry said that almost 100% of the multiplayer maps in the game feature water -- presumably, he meant "feature" in the sense of having resource nodes in the water, and enough water around to build whole bases in. All three sides can in fact build amphibious bases, and some of the maps even start with your con yard floating in the water, so C&C fans yearing the first real naval action since Red Alert 2 should be in for some real good eats.

Chris Corry also put up a few slides about how EA sees the community. I thought this one was particularly neat, so I asked to take a picture of him standing in front of it:

If there's one thing I've taken away from all the summits and other game events I've been to, it's that yes, they really do care, they really do listen, and often they really do think the same way. Soemtimes the problem is priorities, sometimes it's business... One of the problems with supporting older games is that the current prodution structure requires them to pull people from live projects (like, say, RA3) in order to work on other stuff (like, say, a patch and mod toolkit for Kane's Wrath). Apoc has already made it known that EALA is building a special "support team" made up of a few devs; I can tell you that this team, headed by former EA RTS German community manager Pete Larsen, is still in its infancy, but RA3 will be the first game they'll be responsible for supporting. The dedicated support team should mean faster patches, better mod and worldbuilder tools and documentation, and -- perhaps most importantly of all -- no vicious cycle of compromising future games to maintain present ones.

Game Overview

The next presentation was given by C&C's Six Million Dollar Man, Greg Black, the face that launched a thousand sidebars (well, one -- C&C3's). He presented a pretty complete overview of all three sides' units, structures, and powers. Although I can't, unfortunately, tell you about Japan (see above), I can tell you that all three sides have roughly analogous buildings, except when it comes to defensive structures. Some of the units are pretty analogous too, but not nearly on the level of Supreme Commander, and the one thing that makes Red Alert 3 special from every other C&C is that every unit has a special power, and, more importantly, units only have ONE special power -- and the hotkey is always 'F'.

It's a simplification for people used to buckets of powers on a few units ("caster" units) and el zippo powers for most others, but personally I think it's a pretty good idea. Of course, some of the powers are obviously mundane -- the MCV's is "deploy", duh -- and others have been seen before -- the Allied GI gets an "more armour in exchange for less speed" mode switch lifted straight out of Warcraft III's Human Footman -- but some of them are pretty neat, and it certainly makes things easier with just one power per unit.

Speaking of powers, some of you asked, and more of you are probably thinking right now: what about money? Do RA3's "special powers", whether from a unit or from the returning "powers sidebar" cost money to cast? The answer is quite simple: no (with one small exception: the Allied Spy [see below]).

In this regard, Red Alert 3 is close, but not identical, to Generals. In C&C3, not only do most special sidebar powers, like the Scrin "Tiberium Vibration Scan", cost money to cast, but even some unit special abilities, like the GDI APC's "deploy mines", cost cash each time you use them. This won't be the case in Red Alert 3. Each unit's power (remember: one for each unit, and just one per unit) will be completely free. Perhaps more importantly, no special power needs to be researched. There are "upgrades" for units, sorta, but they're part of the Generals-style "Generals Points" system, not things you have to pay money for at tech structures.

What this means is that, although some aspects of the game are looking a lot like Generals, we shouldn't be seeing multiplayer battles devolving into hordes of GLA Scorpion Tanks as each player waits to grab the rockets upgrade. Instead, because all the special powers are right there from the start, what EA is designing the game to make happen is that when two players are embroilled in a low-tech-tank-versus-low-tech-tank battle, the player who makes better use of their special powers and/or gets the low-tech-tank-counter first, should be the one to win the fight (if not necessarily the war...). The removal of research also brings the game closer to its true parent -- Red Alert 2 -- which of course featured absolutely no research or upgrades whatsoever, beyond veterancy (which is, of course, present).

"Sidebar" powers work more like they did in Generals, but not entirely. Whereas some special structures in Generals provided "superpowers" of their own (e.g., the USA Prison's "Intel Scan"), all powers in Red Alert 3 are exclusively derived from either superweapon structures (Iron Curtain, etc.) or the XP-based "General's Points" system. And yes, for those of you wondering, these powers can include reinforcement drops, support powers to spy on the enemy, and immediately destructive powers (bomb drops, etc.).

One of the key things about the destructive powers in Red Alert 3 is that EA has recognized they can be really annoying to use when the destruction delivery mechanism (the bomber that delivers the carpet bombs, for example) is inconsistent in its delivery times. If you recall, most of the "bombing run" type powers have depended on the bomers spawning in on one side of the map and making their way across to the target. Although it's realistic, and gives the enemy the chance to avoid death by shooting down the bombers, it also means that it's hard to use these powers on enemy armies, since the time-to-death is inconsistent. In Red Alert 3, all destructive powers have been designed so that there's a consistent amount of time between your "click" and the game's "kaboom". In my opinion, this is a welcome design upgrade that should promote the more tactical use of powers.

For you turtlers, before I get to the unit run-down, a little note: Yes, walls are in. They build roughly like those in Battle for Middle-Earth II, though, of course, each side does have a unique build mechanic...

Oh, and one last thing before we begin: infantry squads are gone. With every unit, it's one sidebar click, one guy pops out of the barracks.

Here's a quick run-down on some of the Soviet and Allies' more interesting units:

Allies

Units:
Dolphins: Yes, Dolphins are back. They're the only allied *water* unit that can reverse-move, by standing up on their fin and paddling backwards in a suitably cute/silly animation. Equipped with a sonic weapon, their special ability allows them to jump out of the water, either to cross a narrow strip of land or to avoid an area-of-effect weapon targeted at them. Unfortunately, there are no Soviet Squids for them to do battle with... Besides sinking boats, you'll have to settle with harassing enemy Bears or Dogs paddling in the water.

Dogs: Dogs also make a return. They're amphibious (they doggie-paddle), though they're obviously not going to be much use against a sumbarine in the water. Their special ability is an instant-cast "bark" that stuns nearby infantry -- including other dogs and bears, bringing an element of fast-response micromanagement to early dog-scouting wars.

Cryocopter: This is a fun one. The only true "support unit" in the entire game, it's incapable of killing stuff on its own. What it can do is apply one of two special effects to other units. In its main firing mode, it fires a cryonic blast that eventually freezes units and structures, rendering them inoperable and causing them to shatter (instant death, but not for structures) if hit by a bullet or explosive weapon. Its secondary firing mode (its special ability is to switch between firing modes) is a shrink ray -- yes, that's right. Shrink a tank and not only does it get a boost in speed and reduction in hitpoints & attack damage, but it also can be crushed by normal-size enemy tanks. Of course, the audio for the unit gets all high-pitch as well. It's useful even on your own stuff: shrink your MCV and it can motor instead of plod over to where you want it to go -- just be careful it doesn't encounter any enemies on the way.

Peacekeeper: The basic minigunner infantry, except these guys have a shotgun whose damage decreases with target distance. Their special power, as previously noted, is the ability to pull out a shield giving extra armour (all-around armour, not just in the front) at the expense of a slowed movement speed

IFV: The IFV is also back, but unlike the original, its "empty" firing mode is only anti-air, not rockets that can hit both air and land. However, each and every infantry unit will give it a unique weapon (let's hope there's no President IFV...), so there's a bit of variety there. For example, put a dog in and the IFV gets huge speakers to blast the infantry-disabling bark in a large radius. Looks-wise, it could be a distant cousin of C&C3's GDI Bulldog.

Spy: The Spy is definitely back, with an all new British accent. One of the more amusing things about him is his amphibious animations: When ordered to get into the water, he peels off his tuxedo to reveal a SCUBA suit. When you bring him back onto land again, he peels off his SCUBA suit to reveal... another tuxedo! A classic gag. Unfortunately, you won't be using him to unlock any fancy secret units like Chrono Terrorists. Instead, while he can infiltrate buildings to steal cash, shut down base power, or shut down a single production structure, his special power is the ability to bribe enemy units. Wade him into a pile of enemies and hit the "F" key -- and have $$$ ready. It's the only special ability in the entire game that needs cash to use, but in return for your money you get permanent control of a randomly selected enemy unit within the bribe radius. Obviously, a great deal when you can steal an Apocalypse tank, but not so much when you rip off a Conscript. The Spy can disguise himself as either friendly or enemy infantry -- your choice.

Riptide: The Allied Riptide is one of the three tier-one amphibious APC units (each side gets one). Being a hovercraft, its main claim to fame is that ability to use a machinegun on land and water, but with the extra boost of torpedos when operating in the great blue sea.

Century Bomber: The big bomber on the Allied side, this one is also the transport, dropping parachutists or bombs off wherever you please. It can only carry one or the other at a time, though, so make up your mind before you send it out.

Carrier: Pretty much a straight copy-and-paste from the RA2 version. You know what this is already.

Engineer: Your typical Engineer guy, except now he's amphibious. The Allied Engineer pulls out a jetski to operate on water.

Javelin Soldier: Literally, the Generals USA Missile Defender, complete with "laser lock" special power. I sense the Generals players salivating uncontrollably with thoughts of shutting down tank rushes with just a couple of these guys.

Mirage Tank: Besides being able to disguise itself as an enemy vehicle, the new Mirage Tank can also provide a cloaking radius for units around it, making it a useful support unit.

Athena Cannon: This Allied artillery unit basically calls down a blast from the heavens in a manner reminiscent of the USA Particle Cannon -- except you can't move it around.

Tanya: Of course she's back, but there was more than one person at the summit complaining that -- horror! -- Tanya Adams is now a blonde. Beyond a change in hair colour, she can still blow up buildings and vehicles with one click, as well as mow down infantry with pistols. Her special power is pretty neat, though: one click, and she's transported about 10 seconds back in time. This means you can run her into a defended base to blow up the MCV, and, right before those minigun towers finally gun her down, you click the power and she's back outside the base, at full health. Talk about ridonculous.

---

On the structures side, the Allies' build mechanic is actually fairly involved. Their buildings do not provide 'build radius'. Instead, to expand your base, you must build a harvester truck and deploy it (its special ability) into an outpost, which provides build radius around it. Their upgrade system is also unique. Instead of placing tech structures to unlock new units (as in previous C&C games, as well as RA3's Soviets), or upgrading individual factories (like in BFME II), you upgrade your Con Yard or Outpost, providing the enhanced tech to all the buildings in its control radius. This means if you've got five war factories all linked to your Con Yard (a blue line appears to show which control building they're linked to), then if you upgrade your MCV to tech level 2, you now have five factories all capable of spitting out T2 units. If you pack up or lose your MCV, though, it's back to low-techsville for you until you deploy another MCV or Outpost and upgrade it back up. Definitely a vulnerable point for the allies.

Besides the unusual 'build radius' system, the Allied build mechanics should be familiar to everyone by now -- you click a button in the sidebar, wait for the structure to build, then click again to place it. Nothing new to see here. With regards to defences, the Allies get the aforementioned "Not Prism Towers No Sir" Spectrum Towers as their high-level defence, with an IFV-style turret as their core-level defense: its gun changes depending on who you've got in it.

Soviets

Units:
Tesla Tanks: Bad news, guys, the Tesla Tank is not a regular unit in RA3. It'll appear in some of the campaign missions as a unit on the map, but you won't be able to build it in skirmish & multiplayer (and probably not even in the campaign). The reason behind this unfortunate cut is that the Soviet Tesla Boat is already amphibious, sprouting legs on land, so the tank is unnecessary. Sorry!

Tesla Boat: Okay, so no tank, how's the boat, then? The Tesla Boat in RA3 is sort of like the Flak Boat in RA2 -- pretty small and fast, and not particularly well-armoured. The difference is that it packs a nice punch in the form of its Tesla attack. It can also get up on land and walk around on legs, a la Supreme Commander. Its special ability is only useable in the water, however. Whack 'F' and the unit shoots out a Tesla Nova, killing any infantry or dolphins around it, and damaging anything else. Allied enemies will need to make sure they use the Dolphin's special "leap" ability to get out of the way.

Sickle: This one's already up on the unit profile pages, so I won't say too much about it, except that it looks pretty good skittering across the map. Its special ability allows it to leap across terrain, jumping up to plateaus where other units won't be able to spot it (units cannot see "up" cliff faces).

Bullfrog: The T1 Soviet amphibious AA vehicle, doubling as an APC. I trust we all know about its unique disembarcation method by now -- a huge cannon shoots the infantry into the air, and they parachute down. Although Terror Drones are in the game, they don't count as infantry, so no para-dropping them onto masses of enemy tanks, sorry!

Terror Drone: Yeah, they're back, but you won't be stuffing them in a flak track and praying your enemy undeploys their con yard. Their special ability allows them to "lockdown" an enemy unit, rendering it immobile but still able to fire. As with many units, they're now amphibious, so while you can't ferry them into a base in an APC, you gain the ability to terror drone your enemy's expensive Dreadnoughts and Carriers -- but please remember while giggling uncontrollably that the enemy ships can still move around and fire, and they've got a lot of hitpoints, so don't think Terror Drones are the be-all and end-all of weapons. They're just close.

Conscript: EA's already got his unit profile up, so there's little to say. You build 'em, you stick 'em in buildings, and sometimes you use their special "molotov cocktail" power, if you're feeling particularly lucky and/or suicidal.

V4: This guy has also already been profiled on the RA3 website, so you already know that his -- actually her, as the pilot voice is female -- special ability fires a MIRV'd saturation barrage to take out weak infantry and wounded units in a small area. Otherwise, the main difference here is that the rockets can no longer be shot down by enemy AA, making this unit a lot more useful in small numbers than it was in RA2.

Kirov: Yes, Kirovs are back, just the same as ever. Their special ability engages a sort of 'overdrive mode' where they go at turbo speed but gradually lose health -- useful for barging past enemy AA to get to that juicy con yard, I'd imagine.

Dreadnought: Also almost identical to its RA2 progenitor, including the ability to fire while on the move, and it has a similar ability to the Kirov -- a temporary firing rate boost that allows for faster salvos at the expense of gradual hit point damage.

Surveyor: The Soviets's base-building mechanics, while slightly different from those in C&C3 (see below), obey the same rules for expansion. Buildings provide build radius, and if you want to plant down a base across the map, you've either got to send an MCV and deploy it into a con yard, build a line of power plants a mile long, or send a Surveyor in to deploy into an outpost. As with C&C3's outposts, you cannot undeploy the Surveyor.

Akula Sub: Basically the same Soviet sub you know and love. Its special ability shoots off a dumb-fire (non-tracking) heavy-damage torpedo straight ahead that will run across the whole map if it doesn't hit anything on the way. This could be very deadly in the hands of micromanagers with good aim: send a scout over to your enemy's naval base, line up your subs a mile away, and let rip with the dumb-fire rockets!

Twinblade: Simple anti-ground helicopter. Blow dem stuffs up.

Bear: Bears are here, son, and there's nothing quite so funny as to park one in front of an enemy barracks and watch them futilely pump out infantry only to have the units torn to shreds by the bear. These guys also doggy-paddle (bear-paddle?) along in the water.

Apocalypse Tank: You've all seen the redesign now -- that was in response to fan complaints that the original didn't look "Apocalypse Tankish" enough, with only two sets of treads instead of four, and long, slim, barrels that didn't look imposing. The Apoc's special ability is a magnetic grapple that sucks enemy tanks in and grinds them up right in front of it -- useful for dealing with masses of enemy tanks. Not amphibious.

Hammer Tank: This one-armed guy is the basic Soviet tank, available at tech 2 (as are all of the basic tanks). His special power is a sort of energy leach that does a small amount of damage to an enemy vehicle, but if the vehicle is destroyed while the leach is active, then the Hammer Tank gets the dead unit's gun -- anything from a King Oni's head to an APC's minigun. Anti-air or anti-infantry weapons are, of course, especially useful upgrades for the Hammer. As with the Apocalypse, this one is strictly land-only.

Engineer: All three sides' Engineers are amphibious; this one pulls a rubber zodiac out of nowhere and gets on his way. His special power causes him to pull out a trusty sidearm, letting him defend himself, albeit poorly, against enemy infantry. Hello, Technician 2.0!

---

On the structures side, while Soviet "build radius" mechanics are the same as in C&C3 (see the Surveyor summary, above), their actual construction mechanic is quite different. Instead of clicking to start construction, then waiting as the structure is built, then finally clicking to place it again, you place it first, and the structure builds up like in Generals, slowly gaining health. This mechanic tripped me up at first, since I was so used to ordering up a building and then forgetting about it, but eventually I figured it out.

For defences, the Soviets get an anti-infantry machinegun turret, an AA flak turret, and, of course, the infamous Tesla Coil.

---

Japan

Hot damn, do I wish I could tell you about these guys... but I can't! Suck it up and wait a few more weeks.

Amphibious Notes

One interesting thing to note is that some, if not most, of the sea/land amphibious units can actually be built at both the War Factory and the Naval Yard -- so you don't need to have a Factory around if you want some Soviet Bullfrogs for AA defence chop-chop, for example. This rule doesn't apply to infantry, though, since most of them aren't amphibious -- no marine Barracks; you've got to get up on land to plonk them down.
Generals' Points

We were also given a little overview of some of the special powers available through Generals' Points. I can't talk about the Japanese ones, unfortunately, but one of the cooler pairs was the Soviet "suck 'n' blow" set. One power lets you haul up enemy vehicles into space using a controllable beam like the USA Particle Cannon, and another power lets you hurl space junk back down to ground -- space junk that by default includes old satellites and other crap, but will also include any units you've previously sucked up, increasing its damage!

Other special powers initiated bombing runs, popped up reinforcement units, provided minor special abilities (like auto-healing) and upgrades (more armour or firepower), or temporary castable boosts like those in BFMEII.

Generals' Points are accumulated gradually over time, so you won't fall completely behind if you're not blowing stuff up, and in fact the system favours the loser slightly, as the rate of accumulation depends on "intensity level" -- with more intensity alloted if it's your stuff being blown up rather than the enemy's. This subtle handicapping mechanic should give losing players a chance to get that zap-all-the-enemy-units-on-screen power just a leeeeeeeetle bit faster in order to save them from destruction... this time.

In the end, you'll get up to 10 points during a match, able to spend them on three progressions having 5 powers each -- in other words, you can buy two thirds of the available powers. Unlike in Generals, all powers cost one point, so you can either max out two of the three trees, spread the points around for a 3-3-4 balance, or do anything in-between.

-----------------

Environments

Next up was a presentation on RA3's environments, and let me tell you, unlike C&C3's various shades of "destroyed" across "desert", "city", and (for variety) "city in a desert", Red Alert 3 has some very colourful, pretty distinct, and definitely gorgeous environments.

There are about 12 different "locales", or sets of structures and map art, in RA3. Heidelburg, Germany, is one environment, with brick dock walls and medieval architecture. There's a locale in Greece, with a sort of RA2-beach-style look; lots of villas and colourful old cars. Geneva, Switzerland, gets a treatment with Victorian architecture, flower gardens, and banks in place of oil rigs. There's an Easter Island setting, complete with Moai statues (some of which might fire laser beams...). Another setting is Leningrad, with "Hermitage" architecture and crisp old-world designs. There's more, but some of them we didn't hear about, and some particularly cool ones we can't tell you about.

These environments aren't tilesets in the sense that you can have only one per map -- go ahead and stick beachside villas and Moai statues in your Leningrad if you want to -- but rather in the sense of sets of structures and terrain decoration that allow the campaign maps to really feel like they're where they say they are, unlike C&C3's somewhat generic locales.

The game's core maps are all being built on a strict tier-based system, with equally spaced ground levels, like in Red Alert 2, though the worldbuilder and the engine are of course capable of doing whatever you want, including bumpy hills and smooth inclines instead of sharp ramps. Many of the structures and map doodads have some neat effects, sometimes actually appearing to create depth. I can't relate the specific example beause it was from a demo campaign map, but imagine being able to place a large underground nuclear missile silo, and being able to see deep "into" the silo when the doors open, even though the actual terrain in the worldbuilder is completely flat.

Oh, and for those of you hungry enough to eat a gorilla, McBurger Kong is in. In fact, he's got a new buddy in the form of a sort of "Big Boy" animated statue with fountain that's associated with a brewery structure. There's even a set of picnic tables and some Octoberfest decor to place with it.

-----------------

User Interface

A discussion of the User Interface was up next, and there are some welcome improvements to talk about. First off, the UI now has a neat, textured, "military-equipment" style to it, as opposed to C&C3's some more modern and spartan design. It's not as "thick" as the stuff in Starcraft or Warcraft, naturally, so you can still see a lot of the playing field, but it's a nice, immersive touch.

Speaking of the playing field, actually, one of the least-used parts of the C&C3 UI -- the stance buttons -- is now a pull-out panel in the bottom right. By default it's hidden away; keyboard shortcuts will still work, but if you want to click on buttons you've got to first click to open the bar. This is a good idea; it's easier to just use the keyboard, but letting people who can't remember shortcuts fold it out provides a UI that suits both kinds of players. The buttons themselves -- including the sidebar icons -- will have better tooltips in RA3, a step up from the terse and somewhat uninformative ones in C&C3. An icon over unit portraits tells you if the unit is amphibious, and special powers will be highlighted in different colours, depending on whether it's a targeted action, a mode switch, or a passive ability.

I was also glad to see that RA2's "waypoint lines" system is back from the dead in RA3. Hold down the waypoint button and you'll see dynamic lines showing you where units are, and where they're going. This was incredibly handy in RA2 when you wanted to make sure everybody was going to the right place, and I'm very happy it's back.

The minimap got a huge kick in the pants for RA3. I swear I could actually see every unit and structure on it -- a result of aliasing (note: not anti-aliasing) around the coloured blips. The aliasing results in blips being surrounded by a small black border that makes it easier to tell them apart when they're all clustered together. Resource nodes and other important map features will also get special icons on the minimap.

As in C&C3, the map is entirely revealed from the start of a match, but it's covered by the fog of war. Sorry, shroud-lovers! The minimap also doesn't disappear when you lose power, unless a spy or other enemy "disabling" unit gets into your base. The team wants to encourage people to pack up their Con Yard and go mobile, and they felt that losing the RADAR was too big of a hit. Of course, this means you can freely sell your MCV for some more buckazoids if you really want to rush hard, and when your power goes down you'll still suffer a 50% hit in build speed for units and structures.

You should already know that Red Alert 3 will be using a "grid-based" building system, as RA2 and earlier C&Cs did. Because the new resource points are actually oriented to face one particular direction, the UI will not only show a silhouette of the optimal refinery location when you're trying to place one, it will actually auto-rotate and even "snap" your mouse to the optimal location when you get close enough.

I don't know if it was in response to points brought up in my C&C3 User Interface article or not, but in Red Alert 3 you can now give Engineers capture orders on buildings that are in the fog of war (like oil rigs or enemy con yards). It even works with deploy abilities like that of the Soviet Sputnik [surveyor], although I admit that while playing I was still in "C&C3 mode", first ordering the Sputnik to a general area, and only then ordering to deploy: in Red Alert 3, the deploy command asks you pick where you want it to be deployed, and the location can be in the fog-of-war.

Finally, the team is looking into allowing players to "draw" on the minimap during matches and replays (a la Guild Wars), allowing them to coordinate attacks or point out things to watchers. The left-side special powers also got a little boost for readability; they all have the associated faction's logo in the background to help make it clearer which is which

Edited by {LP}Admiral-(NL), 29 June 2008 - 12:03.

[Amdrial]

Page 2:

Units are the Stars

Greg Kasavin of Command School fame stepped up for a brief presentation he called "Units are the Stars". Those of you worried that RA3's Russian and Japanese humour will go overboard ought to rest assured in the fact that not only was GK born in Russia, has a Russian last name, and speaks fluent Russian, but he speaks fluent Japanese as well! There was actually a point in the post-event discussion where one of the Russian-speaking attendees expressed concern that the game's "Russian Humour" wasn't authentic enough (Russian humour tends to be pretty dark), and he and Greg got into a little Slavic back-and-forth, so that's neat.

Anyways, Greg's presentation went over the "unit bible" he whipped up for RA3; an interesting document, it's basically a one-page-per-unit guide for all of the artists involved in the project. Along with a description and sample photo (e.g., Daniel Craig as the Allied Spy), each entry included a sort of "character history" and set of possible quotes -- the idea being to guide the modellers, animators, script-writers, and even voice actors to ensure that each unit has enough personality all on its own.

It was a nice piece of work, and it was good to see that, yes, there really is someone in charge of "the character" of the units.

-----------------

Audio & Music

After the UI discussion and some more playtesting, we got a set of presentations about RA3's music, audio, and audio engine. I've always been a huge fan of game audio and especially music. I've got fond memories of upgrading to a SoundBlaster AWE 64 -- with its waveform-driven MIDI engine, as opposed to the sine-wave based one in the SB16 -- and revelling in the upgraded music in masterful games like TIE Fighter... and yeah, even Doom.

Since then I've always been pretty "ahead" on the audio curve -- After I got the AWE64, I later upgraded it with an 8 MB module (a huge amount in those days), and I even had a 5.1 audio system for my computer before I had one for my home theatre setup... Now I'm rocking a Sound Blaster X-Fi (Fatal1ty Edition, of course) with a 500W 7.1 setup.

Anyways, the point of this shameless self-promotion is to drive home the point that, yes, I love game audio. I love game music. Which made things a little amusing when the audio engine guy Mical Pedriana, who's been working on EA RTS games since Red Alert 2, got up and basically claimed that people don't appreciate game audio enough.

Of course, he was referring primarily to "game reviewers". Specifically, he took a few moments to show off some of the enhancements impelemented in BFMEII and compared it to another RTS game released at the same time, Age of Empires III. I admit I didn't notice each of the individual effects, but I do know that BFMEII has by far the best audio I've ever heard in an RTS. Some of the effects added were actually pretty neat. Depending on how many guys you have selected, audio responses (when you select a unit, when you order it to attack) actually get more complex in BFMEII, with additional layers of people shouting and more and more swords clattering. Even better, there's an element of timing to it all; ask a unit that hasn't done battle in a little while to assault a position and the response will be especially enthusiastic. I'm sure most BFMEII players noticed how squads will also cheer loudly when a hero unit is nearby, or attacking with them. He didn't mention it, but I also especially liked how infantry would yell "Nazgul!" or "Run for cover!" when assailed by airborne ring-wraiths or pelted with catapult missiles.

And, of course, AoE III has none of these things. It doesn't even have distinct unit responses. Or even multiple unit responses. Every single guy always says the exact same old-English or Danish or whatever thing every time you click on them. There's minimal environmental audio, no sense of a hundred guys making more noise than just five, etc., etc.... And the poor EALA audio guy couldn't believe how AoE III garnered praised for its sound engine.

Now, I do agree. AoE III has terribly flat audio (nevermind the horrifically zoomed-in look, ugh). However, I did point out that the AoE series has traditionally appealed to history-buff type strategy gamers, who may be more interested in simply recreating historical manoeuvers, rather than the kind of "cinematic gaming" he was looking for.

But I'm covering things out of order. Before Mical harangued us about audio engines, there was talk of a topic very close to C&C gamers' hearts: music

---

RA3's music was described as ranging "from traditional Japanese to Nu Metal", and it's going to be dynamic, as in C&C3. Building and deploying will be accompanied by orchestral music, while combat will revert to RA's roots in rock. We got to listen to some samples by the various composers; I liked most of them, but I did express some distaste for the low-key parts of the Russian soundtrack -- they sounded a little too much like the Hans Zimmer stuff in "The Rock", which of course was totally ripped off by the USA music in Generals, so it didn't sound very... Russky. I suggested some male choir stuff might be better; Red Army Choir chanting-type stuff like in The Hunt for Red October.

But what was that about "various composers", you ask? Yes, Red Alert 3's music is actually being composed by no less than four separate musicians. I'm sure you all know by now that they've managed to rope Frank Klepacki in to do a remix of Hell March 3 as well as one other track. We didn't get to hear any of his work, unfortunately. I'm really looking forward to hearing Hell March 3 myself...

The three other artists are Timothy Wynn, who's handling the "tense" music. He's done a lot of TV and advertising work, as well as scores for indie films; here's an interview I found for some more info about the guy.

Next up is James Hannigan, who's previously done work for EA's "Harry Potter" series of games, as well as well-known spaceflight game Freelancer, indie title "Evil Genius", and little-known PC strategy game "Republic". Hit up the link for the artist's personal site, which includes some samples as well as tons of lists of awards and reviews. Mr. Hannigan will be handling some of the guitar pumping music as well as the "bombastic" orchestral pieces; muich of his work will be focused on the Japanese side.

Rounding out the trio is Mikael Sandgren, who did work for Kane's Wrath and Generals, as well as Quake 3: Arena, if you can believe it. He's tackling the main themes.

As far as musical inspirations go, Japan's bumpin' tunes will be inspired by J-Rock while the Soviets get the Nu Metal when the heat is on. The Allies' main theme is yet to be announced (perhaps this will be the "secret" Frank Klepacki track?) The game will make use of three "combat" music themes: one when you're winning, on when you're losing, and one when the fighting is still too close toc call. Outside of enemy encounters, the "exploration" music actually has several intensity levels depending on a calculated "threat level" -- perhaps how many units you and your enemy have, how close you are to him, how high the tech level is, etc. Campaign missions, however, will have fully scriptable music for use during in-game cutscenes. Let's hope the Worldbuilder exposes those mechanics to us so players can make their own, thematically coordinated missions as well.

A note about dynamic audio, though, from my own perspective: one of the problems with dynamic audio is that it means that some of the best music -- the really upbeat, kickin' tracks -- are only heard during busy times on screen, when the player may actually be too distracted to listen to it. This is of particular concern to me in C&C games as action is typically over pretty quickly, and furthermore the action gets pretty loud, making it hard to focus on the music.

I'm not saying dynamic tracks are bad, mind you, but there is this trade-off: by making the music fit in with the mood, you make it subservient to the mood, and unable to create a mood in its own right. Personally, I do like getting a bit of pumpin' music going when I'm building up before the big fight. I find it puts me in the mood to fight, and maybe I need that more than music while I fight... What do you guys think?

---

But back to RA3's audio presentations. The final piece of the audio pie was a little presentation on audio design from Evan T. Chen, senior sound designer at EALA's RTS team since the first BFME. He gave a litlte overview of how the movement SFX for the Apocalypse tank was created -- it's actually the sound of an M60 tank's treads vocoded with the engine room of the New York Staten Island Ferry. Vocoding as an audio effect is basically the idea of playing one sound in the "voice" of the other. It's what's being used when someone's got a "robot voice" going on in a TV show or movie -- the real voice actor's voice, fed through the vocoder with a simple sine wave of a given pitch, basically means that his vocal cords have been replaced with the sine wave, while his mouth and throat are still doing their thing to make the different kinds of sounds.

But you don't have to understand all of that to understand that yes, the Apocalypse tank sounds big, clanky, catankerous, and has a nice, throaty growl when its engine revs up. I'm looking forward to blasting RA3 over this 7.1 system with a hundred of them suckers driving around on-screen...

-----------------

Day 2

Day 2 began much as Day 1 did, with crazy taxis to EALA and breakfast burritos for many, if not most. Much of our time on Day 2 was spent actually playing Red Alert 3 in multiplayer (as well as a few skirmish matches), which I found was a welcome change of some previous summits where we got very little hands-on time. Even though I'm not a multiplayer guy and would have much preferred to play a few campaign missions, it was pretty fun, and everybody got a good look at the game.

I even managed to screw up and lose a couple of skirmish matches because I clicked on the "Red Alert" button that will pop up whenever the game thinks you're losing -- click on it, and your ability to repair and construct new structures is permanently removed, while all of your buildings take gradual damage. In exchange for this rather terminal condition, all of your units will build instantly, so if you're sitting on a lot of cash but facing a huge deficit of units, and you think you're about to get totally boned, then by all means click it and maybe pull off the greatest comeback of all time...

... but more likely you'll just prolong the inevitable.

-----------------

Battlecast Main Event

And speaking of prolonging the inevitable, that's how I can describe my "Main Event" match against C&C Files' JohnWE. Earlier on Day 1, Apoc asked us if we would like to be videographed and live-commentary'd by Greg Black and Jason Bender in a Kane's Wrath match.

Of course, I took it in stride and said I'd love to... but that JohnWE would destroy me since I've played approximately 0.0 matches of Kane's Wrath online, maybe 3 matches of C&C3 online, and hardly any RTS multiplayer before those. I'm just not a multiplayer guy.

My only thought was to go down in a blaze of glory by picking the "Black Hand" subfaction of Nod. Flamethrower everything. JohnWE actually went random and managed to get the same goddamn side, so there went my hope for a flame -vs- non-flame match. In the end, he wound up doing most of the burninating, but I didn't go down easy.

I definitely made a couple of total mistakes owing to my complete inexperience with KW. First of all, I mistakenly thought the Black Hand had access to Shadow Teams, and I was hoping to do a Shadow Team rush... durr, strike one. At least I wasn't noobish enough to think they had access to air power as well.

Relatively big mistake number 2 (more of a misconception, really) was thinking that the Laser Fencing power was a timed effect; in my defence, the tooltip says nothing about whether the effect is permanent or not, and I'd never actually used it, so that's why I waited until the very last second to cast it on my Con Yard. In retrospect this was probably a pretty decent decision, actually, as it meant that I gained a few precious seconds while JohnWE still thought my CY was a valid target. Putting down the fencing too early would have just led to him blowing up everything else even faster. I certainly hope the RA3 tooltips don't let me down like the C&C3 ones did.

I did manage to keep an income coming during the whole game (I had two spikes, and kept my harvesters alive), but had I been aware of the two more spikes at the bottom of the map, I might've been able to stave off defeat a little longer -- another strike against the C&C3 minimap (fixed in RA3!0, which is cheerfully completely devoid of any information like that, forcing players new to a map to scroll around aimlessly to find sites of interest -- something I had little time for.

If you've watched BCPT you saw how I charged tanks against JohnWE's carelessly naked artillery, eventually microing them too close for his arty to target. I also pulled a bunch of "hammer and anvil" manoeuvres near the end, retreating my forces to the north of the route to my base, bringing them down only when John was sending units in to attack the defences I was hastily throwing up.

It was of course a lost cause, but even when I lost my con yard I didn't give up -- I built another one and was soon back at the same (low) tech-level I'd been at. I even manged to take down one of the three Purifiers JohnWE sent into my base before it went completely down.

If I'd played even a single match or two with Black Hand (heck, even some skirmish practice) I probably could have done a lot less badly against JohnWE, who's played at least a hundred KW matches and many more C&C3 matches as well.

But, you know, winning isn't everything...

RA3 Tournament

Except when it comes to Red Alert 3. Apoc organized an RA3 "mini-tournament" in the afternoon, and by "random" selection (whatever) I was matched up against JohnWE once again in the first round. Expecting to get knocked out, I nonetheless picked glorious Soviet Russia and actually managed to quite handily beat JohnWE at Japan -- which he was trying for the first time.

There were some really great moments during that match, but unfortunately I can't tell you about them -- yet. Don't worry, though, the memory of how I won at RA3 is as clear as that of how I lost at KW, and as soon as the "Japan and gameplay experiences" embargo lifts in July you can expect to hear all about the match right here.

Even though I beat JohnWE at RA3 and was entitled to move on to the next round of our single-knockout elimination tournament, I stepped aside and opted to let him continue in my stead -- there was more than one C&C3 tournament winner in the room, and I knew I wouldn't have a chance against them, but JohnWE might.

Unfortunately, he let me down, losing in the quarter- or semi-finals -- I don't remember which. What I do remember is the crazy intense final matchup that Polish player N4kai eventually won in a three-part series. The best part about the final match was being able to watch one of the players' game on the big screen, and let me tell you, N4kai is insane. He seriously never clicked on the sidebar even once -- it was all, 100% hotkeys. The mouse was used only for scrolling, for selecting units, and for ordering units to go somewhere. Special powers, retreat manoeuvres, constructing buildings and queueing up units -- all keyboard hotkeys. There were some really tense moments that had most of the audience "ooh"-ing and "ahh"-ing at what was going on.

I don't remember as much of that match, but it definitely revealed some gameplay mechanics in Red Alert 3 that I will gladly tell you about as soon as the embargo lifts...

Worldbuilder (Woot, finally a moment for us)

The final presentation, and perhaps the most controversial, was one given by the Worldbuilder coder and one of the map artists.

Let me get one thing absolutely clear: Even though I'm strictly a singleplayer guy, I love RTS maps and replays. Back in high school and university, two sites that I visited on a daily basis were TAMEC and BattleReports.com. BR.com is still active and it contains some truly spectacular writeups of leading RTS matches (typically, SC and WC3), with tons of pictures, photoshopped images, and sometimes even flash video movies with narration. Before BR, I also used to visit a little Starcraft website called SimpleCraft that is now unfortunately defunct (its main guy, DrLego, eventually started now-also-basically-dead online comic Warbucket). SimpleCraft had these great slideshow-type presentations showing off what happened in individual Starcraft matches; I've actually had them all saved on disk since they were first put online in 1999...

... So that shows you how much I like replays. But let me tell you about maps. As I mentioned, I used to visit a place called TAMEC at least once a day -- the Total Annihilation Map Editing Center. It's still online, hosted over at PlanetAnnihilation, and if you still play TA you should definitely give it a look.

The thing about Total Annihilation is that, once the official map editor came out (and actually a bit before that, since people figured out how to make them on their own) there were like a billion freaking maps, because making good-looking and decent-playing maps was so ridiculously easy at the low end, but the map engine was totally open.

Total Annihilation's maps are made up of tiles, but not tiles in the sense of little squares like in Red Alert 2. Instead, a "tile" was a prefabricated piece of terrain that could be virtually any size -- as small as a single tiny square, for the purposes of covering large fields, or as huge as a mountain that dominates the entire map, for really big features. TA maps are made simply by slapping down these guys, and they're easy to make in a 3D modelling program.

Naturally, there was a loss of fine detail control and the ability to make really different-looking maps unless you made your own tiles in a 3D modelling program, but map editing was so bloody easy that so many people got into it, and became really good at making basic maps, that they soon went on to do crazy stuff like adding entire new tilesets and hacking things into maps that the game wasn't supposed to be able to support, like exploding barrels and bridges.

I remember one map that toally blew my mind, called blueprint2. It's still on TAMEC, although the thumbnail and review are busted. I still have this map myself, in a gargantuan 2 GB ZIP package of like a hundred TA maps that I pull out whenever I feel the urge to reinstall TA.

What makes this map so distinct, as you might guess by the name, is that it is basically a blueprint. I mean, literally. It is a huge paper-white map with all the terrain penciled in and named. There's this big oval-shaped thing drawn in blueprinting ink, and in the middle of it is written "LAKE", and what do you know? It's a lake. You can build a naval yard in it, and your boats will motor around in it. There's a little circle in the middle of the map with the word "MOUNTAIN" in the middle, and if you send units to it you'll see them get "closer" to the screen as they climb the hill, and if they're on one side and the bad guys are on the other, their shots will hit the "mountain".

Obviously, it's not a map you want to be playing in multiplayer a lot -- it's kind of hard to navigate -- but damn if that is not the coolest idea for a map ever, no?

The point -- and I do have one, 7 paragraphs later -- is that this kind of crazy experimentation in vast quantities is what you get when a game has a ridiculously easy-to-use map editor. Tons and tons of people just fire it up and make a little piddly (but still functional and pretty good-looking) map in a snap, and then a chunk of them take it a step further and make a more complicated map, with deeper strategy and better looks, and then a chunk of those people graduate to a slightly higher level, and so on.

But if the "first level" is too hard -- if the learning curve is too steep; if it takes too much effort to just make a map that doesn't look awful and actually works -- then you miss out on the whole trickle-down, and the result is simply: hardly any fan maps.

Total Annihilation didn't even ship with a Worldbuilder in the game. They actually released it later as a huge-ass download, and included it in the first expansion pack. But because mapping was so easy and so powerful, tons and tons of people got into it.

This was the kind of mentality I had when I got into a rather tense argument with the Worldbuilder guys. Make no mistake, Red Alert 3 is a great-looking game, and the RA3 map editor should be sufficient to let an expert mapper create some gorgeous-looking maps... but that's an expert. At the beginner level, the map editor is frankly overwhelming. The Worldbuilder guys were showing off all these cool things you can do in the RA3 level editor, how quick it was -- for the expert mapper -- to place shoreline sections, ramps to higher levels, to prototype a map in Photoshop and then import the terrain as a TGA (yes, they fixed that mysterious menu item for RA3's Worldbuilder), all this cool stuff -- but there's a lot missing that will make it tough, damn tough, for Johnny 15-year-old to make his first RA3 map and not have it suck so bad that he doesn't bother trying again.

Red Alert 3's terrain, like Red Alert 2, is based around discrete height intervals; something like about 70 units of height. The good-looking cliffs and shores we've seen are actually made up of modelled pieces that the mapper has to place, individually, along shorelines and cliff faces -- and here's the kicker: those pieces are not necessarily all the same height, because the distance from the sea floor to the first ground level (for example), may be 80, and the height level differences may be different for different map "locales". The Worldbuilder as it was two weeks ago provided no mechanism for creating terrain at specific height levels (beyond using the "level to height X" tool and just keeping the numbers handy), nor for telling how high the cliff-face/shoreline pieces are, though they do, at least, automatically snap to the map grid.

There are also some tricks that may trip up newbies. The water level must always be at a certain height, because the reflection plane is hard-coded to 200 units -- you can have the water at a different level, but the surface reflections will be out of whack.

Coming from the idea that a tough-to-learn map builder will mean few decent mappers, and few decent mappers means few deecnt maps, I really hammered the Worldbuilder guys -- too much, actually, and I regret causing friction during the presentation. The problem isn't that they don't want to make these changes, the problem is that they're as hamstrung by budget and schedules as RA3 beginner mappers will be by the Worldbuilder itself. When I chided them for allowing such an "experts-only" product to be put out, it was unnecessary -- these guys are not stupid, and they know just as well as I do that this isn't going to foster a huge outpouring of fan maps.

If you Worldbuilder guys are reading this, Charles Jacobi, Scott Smith, John Machin, I'm sorry for busting your balls like that. I know you know how to make quality stuff, and I want you to know that I know you know. The best thing you can do for Red Alert 3's Worldbuilder, if you can't make it easier for noobs (heck, I'll even go ahead and say it: noobs like me), is to document the process you use to make a map, thoroughly and with examples and pictures. From the "I have a dream" to .ZIP to share with other people, the Worldbuilder manual must cover the steps you, the experts, use to make a map. My top two suggestions for WB enhancements to consider would be:

1. A "height palette" or other mechanism to allow people to paint height directly without having to constantly input numbers.
2. Information in the Worldbuilder, or at least in an external document, saying exactly how high each of the cliff-face/shoreline pieces is.

---

We were told that the worldbuilder should ship with the boxed game... but no guarantee. The Mod SDK, on the other hand, will almost certainly not ship with the game at launch. I've tried to make mods for C&C3, and it is... hard. Really freaking hard, actually, and this is from a guy who writes mod code for Doom 3. I managed to get a C&C3 mod working, but it was so trying that I haven't actually released my (epic) JuggerMOD, featuring replacement sounds from a movie clip probably 99% of people thought stopped being funny about the time that Vinne Jones said "I'm the Juggernaut!" in X-Men 3. Besides, if I went back to working on it now I probably wouldn't be able to figure out how to compile the damn thing any more.

However, C&C modder-turned-EA-employee Mastermind2004 will reportedly be at the helm of the mod toolkit, so that's probably a good sign. I have to admit, though, that MM and I don't always see eye-to-eye on everything related to C&C: he disagreed with my Interface Article proposals for allowing players to issue capture/deploy/unload/etc. orders in the fog-of-war, but nerr-nerr, smarty pants guy! Red Alert 3 is doing things my way.

Unfortunately, modders hoping to be able to radically alter the UI will still be SOL: RA3, like C&C3, uses a proprietary Flash-like system for its UI, and EA is unable to license the toolkit for fan use.

[Amdrial]

Page 3:

Q&As

And that just about wraps up what we learned about Red Alert 3, besides what I can't tell you about Japan and my gameplay experiences. After the final presentation on the Worldbuilder and a bit more playtesting, we had a big wrapup meeting in the conference room, with much of the dev team in attendance. All of the summit attendees got the chance to voice their views on the game.

I did manage to answer almost all of the questions posted on the forum thread at the summit, so here they are, grouped as they were on the printout that I took with me:

C&C3

Some people wanted questions answered about C&C3 and Kane's Wrath, and here they are:

Q: Vanilla 1.10 patch coming?
A: Would like to, but probably not enough time.

Q: KW 1.01 patch?
A: The most important thing to EA at the time. They announced it as being out in BCPT11, but it's not actually available yet.

Q: Further patches beyond vanilla 1.10 & KW 1.01?
A: Depends on how broken stuff seems to be, after KW 1.01...

RA3 Design

Q: Why is it based off of RA2 (slapstick) instead of RA1 (serious)?
A: The team felt that it would be nice to do something "light" for a change (you know, because C&C3 is so believably serious...)

Q: RA3 Expansion Packs to be "integrated" into the main app or "separate"?
A: Impossible to answer at this time

Q: What happened to the oversized units & missiles?
A: The team felt that the game looked to weird when some stuff was grossly larger than others (e.g., see Allied Carrier)

Q: Is destroyable terrain in?
A: Sadly, no.

Q: Does each faction get a different harvester?
A: Yes, they do have different special abilities, though the harvesting mechanism (drive up to derrick, get load, drive back) is the same for all three factions.

Q: Will there be AA infantry?
A: Yes, the Allies and Soviets both have AA troopers. No comment on Japan.

RA3 Story & Campaign

Unfortunately, I couldn't answer many of these, since I didn't see the campaign. Here are the ones I can answer:

Q: Can the AI partner be controlled in co-op campaign?
A: Yes, via simple button commands

Q: Is the campaign different when played with human vs with AI?
A: Shouldn't be, besides whether your ally is a complete retard... or your best friend.

Q: How many generals per side, for the campaign?
A: A few... no idea on the exact number.

Japan

No answers for this category due to the embargo, sorry. I will post these as soon as the embargo lifts

Q: How many units are transformers?

Q: How do the Japanese build?

Russia

Q: Can Dreadnaughts go on land and Apocalypse Tanks go in water?
A: No, neither of those units is amphibious (but the Dreadnaught has colossal range, so you shouldn't need to bring it up onto land).

Q: Can Terror Drones enter Bullfrogs? Will they parachute out?
A: Terror Drones are not considered infantry, and Bullfrogs can only carry infantry, sorry!

Q: Are Tesla Tanks in?
A: Yes, but only in campaign missions. In skirmish & multiplayer, they are not available (use amphibious Tesla Boats instead).

Q: Is the Stingray (Tesla Boat) amphibious?
A: Yes, and it can serve as a (very slow) Tesla Tank on land.

Q: Come on, give us Tesla Tanks!
A: Again, they're only in the campaign (yeah, I know, everybody loves the Tesla Tanks).

Q: Why are Apocalypse tanks so "small" looking?
A: The art has been reworked, and they should no longer look quite so puny.

The Allies

Q: Can the Spy do more than just infiltrate enemy buildings?
A: Yes, you can use the "bribe" power, the only special ability that costs money, to steal an enemy unit. This does not consume the Spy like infiltrating a building does.

Q: Do Allied Aircraft Carriers rearm/repair other air units?
A: No, they are "Drone Carriers" and can only repair & rearm their special drone aircraft.

Gameplay

Q: Are there any mobile or repackable factories?
A: No, all factories are permanent once placed, but some sides can build anywhere more freely than others.

Q: Are walls in?
A: They sure are. They build sorta like in BFMEII.

Q: Are there any turrets?
A: Yes, each side gets at least two defensive turrets.

Q: Are there any unit upgrades?
A: No, except for bonuses provided by Generals' Points powers.

Q: Do units' special powers need to be researched?
A: No, special abilities are always available immediately, although Generals' Points may provide some enhancements (like units being able to repair themselves when they damage enemies).

Q: How do special powers work? Like in Generals (free, based on points)? Like in C&C3 (cost money, based on tech)?
A: Like in Generals, but even more free. Special powers and special abilities are all free to cast, save the Allied Spy's "bribe" ability.

Q: Will Engineers be able to repair civilian structures?
A: They are unable to repair civilian structures (garrisonable buildings), besides tech buildings such as oil rigs and the like.

Q: Air Superiority fighters: special abilities?
A: Most of them have "return to base" as a special ability. Note that air units just hover in place now, instead of circling around.

Q: Air Superiority fighters: can attack ground?
A: Some. A mode switch may be involved, meaning they can only attack either ground or air at one time.

Q: Are infantry still created in "squads"?
A: Nope! Infantry are now one-for-one! Squads are finito.

Q: Will "reinforcement" type powers cost moeny to cast?
A: No, all powers are free, even the ones that spawn in extra units.

Q: Why grid-based building?
A: It's just easier to deal with, like flat terrain. Makes base-building a lot simpler, and also allows the UI to provide a lot more feedback about why a building can't be placed where you want it -- individual squares will turn red to show obstructions, just as they ought to.

Console Versions

Q: What happened to RA3 PS3?
A: It's "on hold". I couldn't get any more than that out of EA.

Q: Will the 360/PS3 versions support mouse+keyboard?
A: No. The UI for those versions will be so different (tailored to the gamepad) that a mouse+keyboard wouldn't really work anyways.

User Interface

Q: How are powers handled when you have a group of units?
A: In the alpha build we played... they aren't. Chris Corry said the team is working on figuring out how that'll work.

Q: How are the player's special powers presented?
A: In a left bar of icons, just as in C&C3.

Q: Are there any new advanced orders, like "single-shot" mode?
A: No, but "retreat" is definitely still present, and still useful with the directional armour. Note that some units (typically, naval units) cannot retreat.

Q: Will ordering "stop" on a factory reset its rally point?
A: No, unfortunately. Go back to playing SupCom.

Q: Will RA2's famous multiplayer taunts make a return?
A: They weren't in yet, but I did suggest it and got some support from other attendees. Greg Black and Chris Corry said they'd think about it.

Graphics, Sound, & Physics

Q: Is blood staying in?
A: It sure is... dunno about German censorship laws, though.

Q: RA3 is said to have a Physics Engine, what's involved?
A: This is mostly used for debris. Broken tank bits will realistically slide or bounce down hills, even knocking into each other.

Q: Any recycled RA1 or RA2 audio?
A: There was a lot in the build we played, but it's not supposed to remain.

Q: Who's doing what music?
A: Frank Klepacki is doing Hell March 3 as well as another track. Timothy Wynn is doing the "tense" music. James Hannigan is doing the hard-rock guitar stuff as well as bombastic orchestral pieces. Mikael Sandgren, the musician for Kane's Wrath and Generals, is tackling the main faction themes.

Q: What's the musical style?
A: Orchestral and moody when nothing's going on, but hard Nu-rock style when things are blowing up.

Q: Deformable terrain in?
A: Terrain is not deformable, sorry.

Q: DX10 support?
A: Nope, this is a DX9 game. The text boxes we played on had crazy CPUs but merely 8800 GTs (a sub-$200 graphics card these days), and they ran the game just fine.

Q: Is RA3 optimized for dual or quad core?
A: Chris Corry says the game runs a lot better on dual-core vs single-core, but didn't know about quad-vs-dual. The game is "heavily multithreaded" according to Chris, but of course most of those threads are going to be deadlocked at any given time. As with most games today, a higher-MHz dual-core is likely to be faster than a lower-MHz quad-core.

Q: Will RA3's maps have variable weather?
A: No. Maps can still have weather effects (rain, snow), but the weather cannot change during gameplay (e.g., as a result of scripting).

Support & Release

Q: Multiplayer vs Singleplayer patches?
A: Red Alert 3 does support issuing balance change patches that only affect MP (which includes skirmish) or the singleplayer campaign. Let's hope they do this.

Q: When is the previously-announced "dedicated support team" coming?
A: Soon. Support team lead Pete Larsen is still putting the team together. They should be ready by the time RA3 comes out, at which point they can theoretically begin work for supporting older games as well.

Q: Worldbuilder available at launch time?
A: Should be. "Around" launch was the answer given.

Q: Mod SDK?
A: Definitely not at launch... no promises beyond "soon".

Q: UI uses the same flash-based system as C&C3 (and hence, no mod tools?)
A: Unfortunately, yes.

Q: Single game box, two playable discs, as in the first four games?
A: Nope. One game, one player.

Q: Will there be a "special edition" release?
A: Yes, but what it will contain have not yet been decided.

-------------------

After the wrapup, a few of the community members got up and did presentations to the RA3 dev team -- the entire RA3 dev team. JohnWE presented a comedy video he's working on -- I gave him a hand with it by "subletting" my loaned laptop for the purpose of previewing the video that he hadn't seen yet (his bro edited it). The vid drew at least a few laughs from the audience.

Next up was modder Blbpaws with a presentation on how his site is trying to help encourage more mapping and modding by providing tutorials covering all experience levels of fan editing. Finally, Smurfbizkit came up to present upcoming C&C3 mod "Mid-East Crisis 2", and Mastermind2004 (who now actually works at EA as a full-time employee) presented upcoming C&C3 mod "Asylum", born from the ashes of C&C3-to-Halo mod Halogen when it got shut down by Microsoft (they're now making their own Halo RTS, Halo Wars).

I had proposed doing a little presentation on my Psychovisuals article, but unfortunately there just wasn't enough time, and after the four presentations were over, the poor tired devs (they were still trying to hit Alpha, already several days late) were at last allowed to leave, but they were not allowed to have any of the delicious pizza that Apoc ordered in to feed those of us who did not have to leave for the airport immediately or who even, as in my case, were not leaving that day at all...

Flying out at 8 in the morning (getting up before 6 AM, yey), I managed to avoid any kind of line-ups at legendarily slow-as-shite airport LAX, nor did I have any trouble with security. Unfortunately, what I did have trouble with was my middle-of-the-row seat; it was a little uncomfortable on the ride to my connection point in Minneapolis.

However, when I got to Minneapolis (which is JohnWE's hometown, actually, even though we weren't on the same flight [wtf?]) I have to admit the airport was totally relaxing because it was seriously the most beautiful airport I've ever been in. There's this huge mall-like gallery in the area between the different boarding gate wings -- this is all inside the security zone, i.e. travellers-only. The airport was roomy, just the right temperature, and literally chock-a-block with shops and restaurants. I almost wish my layover was more than an hour, as it was seriously the most spectacularly well-built airport I can conceive of. There was tons of seating (even in the "mall" area!), big skylights, a nice quiet atmosphere with no constant loud-ass announcements, and the PA system actually worked so well I could understand every single announcement without needing a pocket garbelese-to-English dictionary!

The trip home only got better from there, as I had an entire row to myself on the Minneapolis-to-Toronto trip. Needless to say, I arrived home perfectly relaxed, which is a huge improvement over a few years ago, when Apoc sent me home on a red-eye flight with a connection in Las Vegas... I got home Saturday morning, but I was totally destroyed that weekend.

Summary

And that's just about the whole trip, minus Japan and my gameplay experiences... and my video, which is also coming soon.

So what do I think about Red Alert 3? Well, it's hard to comment on the gameplay, since it's under embargo, but I think a fair chunk of the C&C fanbase will be pleased with the way MP works. Many of the changes really are for the better, I think, and the UI is leagues better than C&C3's clunker -- just playing through the rest of the Kane's Wrath campaign recently, I actually already miss RA3's various enhancements.

There is definitely no denying that RA3 looks gorgeous; stuff just literally pops out of the screen at you, with tons of colour and great, crisp, graphics. The team really nailed the RA2 "look", and the test boxes we had were sporting Nvidia 8800 GT graphics cards, which are now just about the cheapest "performance" class cards you can get (and easily run C&C3 at max-everything), so it shouldn't be too demanding, performance-wise.

It's unfortunate that I didn't get to try the campaign, as that is really my favourite part of any RTS game. I did see a few teeny-tiny clips of it, used as examples for how the sound effects and music systems work, and it does look like there's a fair amount of effort being put into it, with a healthy dose of RA2-style humour. The crowd actually lol'd at one point, and that's a good thing. I just hope it doesn't suffer from "Supreme Commander Syndrome" like the campaign in Kane's Wrath -- basically the symptoms of "SupCom Syndrome" is that when a mission starts, you're given a ridiculously easy objective and, as soon as you achieve it, you're hit with waves of hard enemy attacks and a new objective that is difficult to accomplish... unless you saw it coming and went for total overkill with your forces, spreading defences everywhere. I still like SupCom, but that kind of campaign mission design just isn't very fun, nor does it make much sense.

It seems like every EA RTS game since Red Alert 2 has had the same knocks against it with respect to editing: a minimally friendly Worldbuilder, and late-to-the-game and hard-to-use mod SDK -- and don't even talk about installing multiple mods until C&C3. There's hope that Pete Larsen's support group will be able to solve this, and the impression I got was clearly one of EA knowing (and admitting) that they fouled up support with past games, and they're trying to turn it around. I doubt RA3 will be the new RTS golden boy of fan creations, but it could very well be a turning point for the EALA RTS studio.

Bottom line? RA3 was fun. I'm not a multiplayer fan, but I had way more fun screwing around with JohnWE in RA3 multiplayer than I did in Kane's Wrath (nevermind that I won at RA3 and lost at KW...). RTS fans should be aware that RA3 continues in the EA RTS traditions of a unit mix that is composed primarily of single-purpose units, with very few "decent vs. anything" units like Blizzard's offerings. Nor are upgrade levels as clearly superior as they are in games such as Supreme Commander, where a L2 unit will smoke dozens of L1 units any day of the week. Whether this is a good or bad thing is up to your tastes.

And as for being a sequel, it's definitely more of a continuation of Red Alert 2 than it is of the original Red Alert, but I might actually go a step further and say that Red Alert 3 is really Yuri's Revenge 2.0 because of its humour, its zany environments (remember, YR went to the Moon), and its eclectic mix of units.

I feel safe in saying that it looks like RA3 will be well within the boundaries of "RTS games that I like". I'm looking forward to seeing more of it to truly be able to judge whether it'll be an "RTS games that I love"...

Here's hoping it's an RTS we all love.






That's the writeup folks, hope you enjoyed it, for the people who want to read it with some more details and all the images I left out, you can view the original article HERE.

[Dutchygamer]

Nice nice nice nice nice nice!!!!!! I so want this game now

[Stinger]

Quote

Q: When is the previously-announced "dedicated support team" coming?
A: Soon. Support team lead Pete Larsen is still putting the team together. They should be ready by the time RA3 comes out, at which point they can theoretically begin work for supporting older games as well.

O_O

Patch for Zero Hour, anyone?

[Sharpnessism]

Stinger, on 29 Jun 2008, 9:23, said:

Quote

Q: When is the previously-announced "dedicated support team" coming?
A: Soon. Support team lead Pete Larsen is still putting the team together. They should be ready by the time RA3 comes out, at which point they can theoretically begin work for supporting older games as well.

O_O

Patch for Zero Hour, anyone?

By "team" they probably mean 1 dude paid minimum wage. By "dedicated support" they probably mean staring at some tech support forum.

[Kris]

Stinger, on 29 Jun 2008, 21:23, said:

Quote

Q: When is the previously-announced "dedicated support team" coming?
A: Soon. Support team lead Pete Larsen is still putting the team together. They should be ready by the time RA3 comes out, at which point they can theoretically begin work for supporting older games as well.

O_O

Patch for Zero Hour, anyone?

I Doubt it but if it does happen... O_O !

[Shirou]

The Apocalypse Tank is redesigned? ??

Can anyone give a link to a picture of that, I cannot find it..

[Kris]

[Stinger]

I am more excited about the Allies now than before. Laser Lock Missile Defenders are back! Our prayers have been answered!

[Archon]

Still nothing about Empire.
Too bad because seems that they will be most interesting side.

[Shirou]

Yeah just like the scrin they are bound to be ''way different''

I hate it when they say that. In CnC3 that ended up them saying the Scrin were unique, with them being absolutely nowhere near unique.

And the King Oni mechs look atrocious in the trailer.

I'm betting for soviets ^^

[Alias]

{LP}Admiral-(NL), on 29 Jun 2008, 21:53, said:

Q: Air Superiority fighters: special abilities?
A: Most of them have "return to base" as a special ability. Note that air units just hover in place now, instead of circling around.

Great, so every plane has that retarded hovering.

[Shirou]

Wouldn't be bad if they implemented it well...

I think that is going to get some fixing up. Also, I don't think a kirov will die so quickly to two of those fighters. Just sped up for sake of that little trailer.

They said gameplay was going to be slower than in CnC3. If so, that trailer doesn't make sense.