Fallout Studios Forums

General Wesley, on 10 Jun 2009, 2:28, said:

1/ Agree
2/ I don't see the problem with the actual promotion system...
3/ No way ! MCV are the worst construction mode ever
4/ Maybe add Europe ? =)
5/ Agree
6/ Better campaign also, the Generals one was too short and uninteresting
7/ Niet
8/ That would be fine if used as a support power (especially the Aircraft Carrier and Battleship, I don't imagine those in the middle of a fight)

Yeah MCVs are weird in a game based on RL as opposed to C&C and RA.

Carl, on 9 Jun 2009, 22:15, said:

Agreed! If you want the build style from 1998 look forward to the next iteration in the Red Alert or Tiberium universes, Getting rid of one of the features that makes Generals unique among other cnc games makes little sense.

TBH i hated MCV's. dozers/cranes/workers FTW

edit.- fail internet
Edited by WNxMastrefubu, 10 June 2009 - 05:46.

General Wesley, on 9 Jun 2009, 18:28, said:

Quote

who would say no to that?

General Wesley, on 10 Jun 2009, 2:28, said:

1. Yep
2. Hell yeah
3. Disagree, keep the dozers. This isn't Tiberium Wars or Red Alert either
4. Maybe USA and China, not sure how you could explain the GLA's remaining presence - though I'm all up for their game mechanic to remain
5. Definitely, though I wouldn't be surprised if we end up playing a ShockWave 2 in the near future
6. Yeuh
7. Eh, not sure. Defences in Gen already heavily accommodate turtlers, not sure what this would be bringing to the table
8. If they do it right, which means ships not being dinky little boats like in RA3 - it will be a very interesting new feature.

Why is this thread turning into "comment on General Wesley's wishlist" thread?

Oh what the heck, I'll hop onto the bandwagon.

Quote

1. Sure.
2. All it needs is the same multi-point system used by the community patch 1.06.
3. Yea, they are iconic to the universe already.
4. Must have.
5. Must have more balance than 1.04 with KR spamming Granger.
6. From experience, walls fail horribly as a defence. Only practical use is for boxing your supplies.
7. Not to the RA3 extent, Tech Naval Yards would be enough.

WNxMastrefubu, on 10 Jun 2009, 1:28, said:

That's actually quite subjective. Define a better online experience. Better servers? Better balance? VOIP? Better matchmaking? More interesting maps? What you may find lacking could be sufficient for someone and wonderful for another. That said, Generals online wasn't that bad though by now it should be able to work through a STEAM-like system.

JJ, on 10 Jun 2009, 8:16, said:

Exactly what I thought when I posted my own comment at the beginning
Anyone to rename the thread ?

I want:

> Easy Modding as it predecessor

> High Quality Graphics (if possible, WiC type)

> NO CATOONY FROM RA3 at all

> FMV Cutscenes

> Detailed General Promotion i mean when you chose on patch, you can go in other one.

> More Generals

> More factions

Gen.Kenobi, on 10 Jun 2009, 22:36, said:

Agreed. Any cartoony shite of any kind whatsoever and I'll not buy it D: .

Cartoony stuff belongs in the RA universe (and may I add RA3 overdid it). Let it stay there.

@Gen.Kenobi: Your first wish won't be conceded, since they'll probably use an upgraded SAGE or RNA again.
Edited by Sgt. Rho, 10 June 2009 - 21:24.

They can change the engine...

They won't, that I can assure you.

Gen Kenobi : EA always say they care about the modders, but not for that kinda things, creating another engine would cost too much for them, and switching back to the old SAGE would lower the quality of the game, I'd prefer have a good game but hard to mod than a bad one with easy modding...

I don't think Generals is a bad game, but anyways, let's see what they are planning

so do i, regardless of people getting pissed about ea leaving tiberium and RA timelines and the fact that the game was "rushed" i believe its a great game, even wthout mods

The new engines have more solid code and crash far less than SAGE 1.0 did. In turn its modding is harder but not impossible.

Yes, but they need a specific version of 3ds max to work... Too bad for the ones who has the newer ones like me.

Gen.Kenobi, on 10 Jun 2009, 23:02, said:

I didn't see Generals was bad, it's my favourite STR game, but it's engine is too buggy and too limited to do another great game which could replenish EA's pocket on it

Carl, on 11 Jun 2009, 1:10, said:

Generals has done a good job of anchoring me on the internet, which is a very nice thing, and the game is exceptionally good for modding, no matter whether it is 'easy' or not. The engine is reasonably, limited, but if you put your mind to it you can sort out a lot of things anyways (eg the teleporting Enforcer in ShW). Gens 2 needs a damn fine engine, but without this ridiculous excuse for 'modding' that is offered by RA3/TW - if they made it just a little bit easier, they'd have a goldmine. That, and no implementing naval warfare beyond what we already see in the current Gens - the engine needs an ultra overhaul but for the most part the content was extremely well implemented in the first Gens and thus could be reimplemented to some degree.

Gen.Kenobi, on 11 Jun 2009, 0:14, said:

You know, you need either 7, 8, 9, or now I think even 10 works, to mod CnC3/RA3, and for generals you need either 4 (gmax) or 7 or 8....

Carl, on 10 Jun 2009, 22:01, said:

They also care about the modders because they have a habit of completing their game development for free.