GRcade

Just saw this...

Somebody Else's Problem wrote:

HSH28 wrote:I don't know what you guys have against the C&C mobile game, other than its a mobile game and you want a PC game. It is what it is, on that basis it looked like it could possibly be decent.

Also, we wanted a proper RTS game with expansive maps and strategy and gooseberry fool, rather than a "capture the missile launcher" game.

Like I said, a PC game rather than a mobile one.

You can't have expansive maps and 100s of units in a mobile game designed for a phone's touch screen and it not be a mess. There's clearly strategy here, its just more focused and designed to be played on a phone screen.

That was punishing. I don't understand how such a large publisher like EA so rarely has anything to show for itself at E3. 3 years in a row now the best looking games of their conference have been indie titles. Also, Unravelled 2 is just being sent out to die. I know people live Shadow Drops like that, but with everything else going on in the next few days nobody is going to buy that.

Somehow they managed to make Anthem look worse than it did last year too. I just....I don't don't know how they did that. It looks soooooo much like a Destiny clone I went from almost certainly buy to ehh.

I'm amazed they can't hire someone to tell them what will play badly on stage too. The Vince Zampella, C&C Rivals and weird Madden thing were absolute trash.

No way that's not the worst conference this year.

Anthem does absolutely nothing for me. It's like they had a brief to make a game as generic looking as humanly possible.

The more I hear about Anthem the less enthusiastic I become about it.

Beyond that the only thing of any remote interest to me from the conference is Jedi Fallen Order and Origin Access Prime.
The Battlefront 2 Clone Wars content seems half hearted at best and Sea of Solitude just looks pretty meh.

Lagamorph wrote:The Battlefront 2 Clone Wars content seems half hearted at best

I was expecting two new heroes and one new map.

I got four new heroes, at least one new map, a huge new Conquest mode. I wanted more, but given the resources EA has diverted away from BFII, I feel somewhat fortunate just to be getting this TBH. Doesn't seem at all likely that my content wish list will be in any way fulfilled with this iteration, though.

more heat than light wrote:Anthem does absolutely nothing for me. It's like they had a brief to make a game as generic looking as humanly possible.

It just looks so bland.

HSH28 wrote:Like I said, a PC game rather than a mobile one.

You can't have expansive maps and 100s of units in a mobile game designed for a phone's touch screen and it not be a mess. There's clearly strategy here, its just more focused and designed to be played on a phone screen.

They could have easily made a new IP and made this game and nobody would care but they called it Command and Conquer and that name comes with the expectation that it's going to involve strategy, multi-unit tactics and large maps.
This is just watering down the name to the point where it's meaningless and gooseberry fool's all over its own history.

If you honestly can't see why people are so underwhelmed by this game then there's not a lot more I can add.
It's the equivalent of making a mobile Elder Scrolls game with 1 unchangeable character, 3 dungeons that can be cleared in 20 minutes and the only ability available being sneak. People are going to be less than impressed.

I wasn't underwhelmed, I was merely whelmed.

It doesn't look awful for a mobile game, but it does look like the sort of thing that'd overheat a phone and drain its battery in no time.

The only plus side is who plays games on a phone in 2018?
If you want to game on the go there's the cheap as chips 3DS and the Switch which are both about a million times better than any phone.

Peter Crisp wrote:The only plus side is who plays games on a phone in 2018?
If you want to game on the go there's the cheap as chips 3DS and the Switch which are both about a million times better than any phone.

Arent F2P mobile games on Android and iOS rapidly becoming the most profitable section of the games industry?

Lagamorph wrote:

Peter Crisp wrote:The only plus side is who plays games on a phone in 2018?
If you want to game on the go there's the cheap as chips 3DS and the Switch which are both about a million times better than any phone.

Arent F2P mobile games on Android and iOS rapidly becoming the most profitable section of the games industry?

I don't own a phone and those Clash of Clans games look bloody rubbish.

Peter Crisp wrote:

Lagamorph wrote:

Peter Crisp wrote:The only plus side is who plays games on a phone in 2018?
If you want to game on the go there's the cheap as chips 3DS and the Switch which are both about a million times better than any phone.

Arent F2P mobile games on Android and iOS rapidly becoming the most profitable section of the games industry?

I don't own a phone and those Clash of Clans games look bloody rubbish.

Yeah but they make insane amounts of money for incredibly little expense.

Peter Crisp wrote:The only plus side is who plays games on a phone in 2018?

The vast majority of people who play games, play them on mobile phones I'm afraid.

Peter Crisp wrote:They could have easily made a new IP and made this game and nobody would care but they called it Command and Conquer and that name comes with the expectation that it's going to involve strategy, multi-unit tactics and large maps.
This is just watering down the name to the point where it's meaningless and gooseberry fool's all over its own history.

That point of view, yeah just don't get it.

Why wouldn't EA use a license they own in a way like this. How exactly does it 'gooseberry fool over its own history'? Its just ridiculous hyperbole. From what I saw the game yes is played out on a single screen map, but has multiple unit tactics and strategy. Just because the concept has been reimagined for a phone screen doesn't automatically make it 'watered down', its just different.

I don't see how this game hurts fans of a classic C&C either, if this does well, it makes it more likely, not less likely that they will make a 'proper' Command & Conquer game.

Because a EA mobile port of a beloved franchise worked so well for Dungeon Keeper, right Hugo?

Tafdolphin wrote:Because a mobile port of a beloved franchise worked so well for Dungeon Keeper, right Hugo?

Presumably because it was a bad game though, nothing to do with it being made for mobile.

They didn't go into details of monetization for the new C&C game. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the game is definitely going to be good or even ok, just what they showed didn't deserve the comments its got so far.

EA have a spotty track record on these things, but then personally I thought Real Racing 3 was ok from that front (think I put 30 days into that game and spent about £2 on it).