SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

User avatar

IskatuMesk
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 8787
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: M͈̙̞͍͞ͅE̹H̨͇̰͈͕͇̫Ì̩̳CO̼̩̤͖͘
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby IskatuMesk » Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:59 am

Honestly, I'm too terrified to see WoL bested in this department. C&C3 was enough EA for me for a lifetime, and RA3 was like... a shotgun mouthwash. I cannot possibly fathom, nor do I desire to, the depths of depravity that C&C4 offers.
Image~[Gameproc]~Image
Warning: dialogue contains politically incorrect content. Viewer rearsore may occur.

User avatar

Falchion
Zerg Broodling Dance Instructor
Zerg Broodling Dance Instructor
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:32 pm
Location: Bragança Paulista, Brazil (Da most borin' place in the world)
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby Falchion » Sat Apr 21, 2012 9:08 am

Master Jademus Sreg wrote:I awarded the Worst Contemporary Narrative In A Game to Command & Conquer 4, awarded for retconning Tiberium's environmental devastation with an asspull technology, and ending the series and Kane's character with a big nothing.


IskatuMesk wrote:Honestly, I'm too terrified to see WoL bested in this department. C&C3 was enough EA for me for a lifetime, and RA3 was like... a shotgun mouthwash. I cannot possibly fathom, nor do I desire to, the depths of depravity that C&C4 offers.


Believe me, I ought to be with Jademus on this one. C&C 4 WAS AWFUL! So much that even Kucan didn't want to play his role. Now, compared to RA3 and C&C 4, Tiberium Wars had pretty much an advanced gameplay (Hard-counter or not, I don't care.) and story.

*On standby to recieve an ass kicking from about everyone in the room.*
How I became a troll in a single post (And you can too!!! :D ): link

Image

User avatar

GnaReffotsirk
Zerg Larva Herder
Zerg Larva Herder
Posts: 338
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 4:54 am
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby GnaReffotsirk » Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:51 am

To add to the article:

The missions didn't mean much to the characters, or was not setup, moved, and resolved to be so.

The final mission for example was supposedly grand. All tensions should have been at the breaking point there, but it was flat.

I made this same mistake with survivors, and the problem I think is because the missions are disjointed. It didn't follow a thought one after the other. It was one thing now, then another later, etc., without resolving anything, or revealing anything and stuff. There's not enough thematic conflict going on or something.

User avatar

Taeradun
Protoss Khalai Missionary
Protoss Khalai Missionary
Posts: 1032
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:08 pm
Location: AU
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby Taeradun » Wed Apr 25, 2012 5:08 am

IskatuMesk wrote:RA3 was like... a shotgun mouthwash
I thought it built on the style of RA2 quite well, except for the LOL HERE'S 20 PORNSTARS FOR NO REASON YOU FUCKIN NERDZ thing. Also I guess the plot was a bit more rushed because instead of each campaign being 10 missions of fighting your enemy it was like 3 missions fighting faction A, 3 missions fighting faction B and 2 missions doing some stupid other thing, and so because of the shorter length you conquered everyone a lot more quickly - but despite that it was still good. I dunno, I can see why people wouldn't like it, but I would've thought RA2 would've been just as bad.
With C&C3, though, the game interface seemed really terrible and unuseable so I ragequit part way into the second mission, and because of that I haven't moved on to C&C4 yet either.


also that SC2 article is good
Image

User avatar

IskatuMesk
Xel'naga World Shaper
Xel'naga World Shaper
Posts: 8787
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:40 pm
Location: M͈̙̞͍͞ͅE̹H̨͇̰͈͕͇̫Ì̩̳CO̼̩̤͖͘
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby IskatuMesk » Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:01 am

I never really cared too much for C&C overall. I never liked the hard counter gameplay. I can understand why people do like them, but it's not my cup of tea. RA3 very much seemed like a last effort to milk the franchise though.
Image~[Gameproc]~Image
Warning: dialogue contains politically incorrect content. Viewer rearsore may occur.

User avatar

Master Jademus Sreg
Terran Battlecruiser Janitor
Terran Battlecruiser Janitor
Posts: 190
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:32 am
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby Master Jademus Sreg » Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:06 am

Command & Conquer has always failed at balance, and the narratives have always been campy. If you can enjoy The Rocky Horror Picture show, you probably won't be bothered by, say, the story in Tiberian Sun or Red Alert 2 and their almost-impossible-not-to-be deliberate silly presentation. Udo Kier as a latex-crowned Russian psychic super-villain? All kinds of B-movie awesome; it can get away with it because it's not trying to be serious.

But C&C across the board fails balance hard, so multiplayer fails hard (not even getting into C&C4; that catastrofuck is outside the scope of this post). The only reason to play C&C is for the single-player campaigns, and if they fuck that up, there's no reason to play at all.

User avatar

mark_009_vn
Zerg Creep Colony Landscaper
Zerg Creep Colony Landscaper
Posts: 440
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:56 am
Location: [[THIS USER, HE IS A CHAR]]
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby mark_009_vn » Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:56 pm

But C&C across the board fails balance hard

Command and Conquer is balanced by not having any balance AT ALL. They just add as much inanity as possible into the game, throws in some Mother Russia jokes, and call it a day, that's that. That to be said, I thought it was cool for RA2 to be a balance-less game, because there is so much shit you can abuse it's amazing.

I never liked the hard counter gameplay.

RA series (minus RA3) is relatively soft countered to speak of, I know because I can dodge Harrier rockets (barely). :P
Image

"I'm begging you, let me work!" - Osamu Tezuka

User avatar

Mucky
Protoss Khalai Missionary
Protoss Khalai Missionary
Posts: 1037
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 10:35 pm
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby Mucky » Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:52 pm

strategy games with hard counters are stupid

User avatar

Falchion
Zerg Broodling Dance Instructor
Zerg Broodling Dance Instructor
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:32 pm
Location: Bragança Paulista, Brazil (Da most borin' place in the world)
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby Falchion » Thu Apr 26, 2012 1:15 pm

mark_009_vn wrote:Command and Conquer is balanced by not having any balance AT ALL. They just add as much inanity as possible into the game, throws in some Mother Russia jokes, and call it a day, that's that. That to be said, I thought it was cool for RA2 to be a balance-less game, because there is so much shit you can abuse it's amazing.


It's quite the contrary, TBH. Every C&C game, especially Tiberium Wars and Red Alert 3, is hard-counter based. Example: Missile Trooper. The missile guy carries a bazooka that, in real life, does a literal clusterfuck of a man and makes some good, penetrable hole in a vehicle/aircraft. In C&C, missiles do shit against vehicles and aircraft but not a scratch against infantry. You'd need at least 20 missile troopers to kill a single infantry.

Also, infantry is only made to fight OTHER infantry, in terms of rifles. As far as I'm concerned, both C&C and SC II are blatantly hard-countered. Marauders and Roaches, anyone? Or, in other words, Rock, paper and scissors.

I dare make a mention of what Mesk wrote in one of his articles. If he complains later, patience, life's like that anyways:

"Hard-counters totally destroy metagame and mechanics because they take the gameplay completely out of the player's hands. He has no choice in what to do because if enemy has unit A he needs unit B because unit C is totally useless. Micro becomes a null-factor and so the gameplay has little driving it other than trying to cockblock the enemy first. Hard counters are boring and pointless and have no place in a modern game."
How I became a troll in a single post (And you can too!!! :D ): link

Image

User avatar

mark_009_vn
Zerg Creep Colony Landscaper
Zerg Creep Colony Landscaper
Posts: 440
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:56 am
Location: [[THIS USER, HE IS A CHAR]]
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby mark_009_vn » Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:52 pm

Every C&C game, especially Tiberium Wars and Red Alert 3, is hard-counter based.


Well, I mentioned only the RA series is soft countered actually (or just RA2 in general, RA felt... off in terms of counters and RA3 is outright blatant hard countered). Because I'm pretty sure that a mass of Conscripts or GIs kills tanks pretty damn fast, and to be honest, massing infantry is pretty hard to counter, dogs and terror drones have weak HP and are melee, heavily mitigating their effectiveness, ranged anti-infantry (alas Snipers) fires so slowly that you could make more dudes than it can kill, Desolator lacks the splash to effectively kills mass of anything, Prism tanks/Mirage tanks are helpless once they're close, and everything that deals splash, usually are siege weapons with little mobility. I've played RA2 for a long time in LAN parties, if it wasn't for soft counters than I probably would never have played the game AT ALL.

Example: Missile Trooper. The missile guy carries a bazooka that, in real life, does a literal clusterfuck of a man and makes some good, penetrable hole in a vehicle/aircraft. In C&C, missiles do shit against vehicles and aircraft but not a scratch against infantry. You'd need at least 20 missile troopers to kill a single infantry.


This is the reason why I said C&C (before CNC3/RA3) have no balance of any kind, your "missile trooper" is obviously intended to kill vehicles. Yet, vehicles have a tendency to run over dudes, and missile troopers are slower than the slowest of fat people. In the end, missile troopers are perfectly useless, they can't kill tanks, but tanks can kill them, what good are they you just makes tanks to counter tanks. When they designed "missile troopers", they paid absolutely no attention to the metagame at all, missile troopers are not intended to give a player a viable counter to tanks, they're there simply because it should be there. If they actually intended on balancing the game by means of hard counters, even the most incompetent would have already give it insane damage (alas Marauders). But they didn't, when they design units for C&C games, they're like: "oooooooooo.. let's add this cool unit in because it's so cool and I like cool-ness and he was like "cool" and I was like "that's cool"...heeeheeeeheeee...", they are all gimmicks, almost everything, every units, and every feature in C&C is but a gimmick.

I dare make a mention of what Mesk wrote in one of his articles. If he complains later, patience, life's like that anyways:


I READ THAT LAST YEAR COLUMN PEE! :P
Image

"I'm begging you, let me work!" - Osamu Tezuka

User avatar

Taeradun
Protoss Khalai Missionary
Protoss Khalai Missionary
Posts: 1032
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:08 pm
Location: AU
Contact:
Status: Offline

Re: SC:L Wings of Liberty Review

Postby Taeradun » Sat Apr 28, 2012 11:05 pm

IskatuMesk wrote:I never really cared too much for C&C overall. I never liked the hard counter gameplay. I can understand why people do like them, but it's not my cup of tea. RA3 very much seemed like a last effort to milk the franchise though.
oh, you meant actual gameplay

never mind then :lol:
Image


Return to “StarCraft II Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest