Normada_Firefox, and possibly others, rather misread what I wrote: “If Gateway had been reassessed and the next game born from it had a new engine, AI sorted etc…”
Please notice the phrase ‘new engine’ – which I fear N_F must have missed as he keeps wittering on about it! In no way did I suggest that Gateway should be re-tweaked. My point was that the endless re-tweaking had to stop. Somebody had to seriously reassess the game, back then, from the ground up, and my point was simply to get this bloody great game to work first, before pimping it.
OK, point taken that 3D engines are the way to go but CC works fine purely as birds-eye view. FOG and GTC were visually stunning so graphics was never an issue. All that was needed was a game that had the psychological heart and brains of CC but was playable by the ‘new’ generation. Let’s look at what should have been reassessed a long time ago. And this, N_F, is not ‘dreaming’, if you are going to reassess something then serious points should be addressed.:
1) A major frustration of FOG and GTC was having a ‘mission’ then doing it, doing it well but at the end the program saying the other lot won because they had ‘more victory locations’. Huh? My task was to get the bridge, which I did! Where was the real break down? If my troops morale was still high at the end, if nobody had freaked out and surrendered; was that taken into consideration? Was it hell. But it should be. ‘You secured the town and all the VLs but your troops morale is so low you need to retreat’ Minor victory rather that total/decisive victory. A player now has the challenge of trying again, to keep his troops under control, maybe ditch that sexy tank in favour of another group leader etc. However, as it stands, every game/battle/operation/ simply boils down to ‘get as many VLs as possible’. Which is not really that interesting!
2) I love sitting waiting, listening to the crump of distance shells. That’s the beauty of the reality of CC – often nothing happens, and often for a long time! Now, I’m fine with that but a modern ‘blast ‘em’ player will die of boredom. What to do? Easy: Mickxe5 mods his, so why can’t the actual game have options? Term them ‘real’ and ‘game’ and the ‘modern’ player might get the drift that keeping people alive and sane, the true essence of CC, is far more important than body count.
The two points show that the game plan, not just the AI, was flawed. Here is a game built around the mindset of humans at war and the results do not reflect, in any shape or form, the handling of it.
Reassess or sort things like that that out before ‘3d’ was my point. I said that we are in danger of getting the same game but in 3D and I fear that seems to be the case. Everyone seems to be begging for screenshots etc but my new question is, and I shout: ‘WHAT IS THE GAME?’. So – Matrix. What is the game? Get as many VLs as possible (but in 3D)? Is that it? I bloody well hope not!
PLEASE MATRIX: You have a gem of a game that works in real time, not turn based: It is a rare beast. Make it work!
Last point: Normada_Firefox, I don’t hide my name – I forget it! It is possibly 15 years, maybe more, since I did a mod or map, which were for CCIII/ Real Red etc. Last time I looked one map (Road 2) was still around, the mod ‘Tanks? No tanks!’ (which stripped AI’s ability to keep trying to replace lost infantry with armor) seems to have gone forever! I was also the first mapmaker to include fallen trees (judging by comments at the time)– which I see were used in FOG and GTC. I also toyed, to some success, of having proper concealed guns under camouflage netting using ‘roof’ and /or ‘trees’. So yes, you don’t know me but I don’t dream – I am pro-active, actually adding my bit to CC’s history; therefore I deserve some right in making points, on being critical. Oh! And you were around back then cos I remember your name, I was living in Barcelona when I did the map and mods (I now live in Russia)– and can I say your English has got a hell of a lot better!!! Abrazos!