Red Alert 3

[ClannerDelta]

I did a search for threads and the one I saw "Red Alert 3 Discussion" had already been derailed into something else, so I'm starting a new one.

Did anyone else buy it? I've been a fan of the series for too long to skip it. The opening FMV was... well, just awesome in how many faces I recognized. Including George Takei leading an Imperial Army.

The combat so far seems pretty good. I'll give more impressions as things go on.

If there is a thread I didn't see feel free to make fun of me. :(

[Hotcod]

i've played it and for the most part dislike it... it may as well be an C&C expiation and i think the knowingness of the cutscenes strayed a bit to far towards being silly and over the top. The combat is fast and there dose seem to be some depth to it but there also seems to be a lot of empathise put on unit powers which is always a pain in the ass to micro manage.

I was a HUGE fan of the first game, got in to it far far more than the C&C games and i don't know this, unlike c&c3 dose not at all capture the same feeling of that first game which is sad. Taken on it's own as a C&C universe game it seems fun enough and i'm sure i'll pick it up at some point but ya some of the acting is painfully bad and not in the same way that some of the rest of the acting is bad but amamzing for being bad... if that makes sense.

[ClannerDelta]

Yeah, I know what you mean. The thing is, I expected and treat this game as more of a parody of the first 2 rather than a true continuation.

I mean... a Japanese schoolgirl and a Macross style airframe/mecha combo. One of the unit abilities is "Premature Discharge". :p

[Hotcod]

Ya, it's clearly a joke but it's just a shame they did it with RA rather than just C&C... if you take RA back to it's roots the real joy of it was that mix between the silly C&C side of things and the honestly interesting and deeply horrid (at times) alternative reality it was set it. RA could be silly and poignant at the same time... something the C&C games could never really pull off for me... people getting murdered by nod are getting murdered by NOD! but in RA the first soviet mission has you massacring defenceless town foke... from what i've seen of RA3 that kind of brutal undertones have been replaced by stupid jokes and boobs... like i said, in and of it's self i'm not complaining about the set up of RA3 overly silly jokes, over the top visuals and action and lots and lots of boobs... it's not deep but it's funny and silly and dose exactly what it set out to do... i just think they've murdered an wonderful IP to do it... for no real reason that i can work out

[CES]

I'm quite enjoying it so far, despite it pretty much being a much more insane RA2. The co-commander stuff is brilliant, as is the AI in general. They're nowhere near as stupid as they were in C&C3, that's for sure.

[biosc1]

been replaced by...boobs...

Hmmm...I had a itch to buy this game...

lots and lots of boobs...

SOLD!

Seriously though...I've had trouble getting into the C&C side of things...I enjoyed C&C1 and RA1. I may have to re-install RA1 and see if that is a style that I still like.

How fast paced is the game? My reflexes have slowed with too many years of Rise Of Nations play, is it easy to get into? Graphically it looks great, but what about the zooming in and out? I heard it may be a little too closely zoomed in?

[Smoof]

I was a huge fan of the original RA, but this just doesn't do it for me. It just doesn't feel the same in anyway. I played the first soviet mission and just had no desire to continue further; definitely wont be purchasing.

[ClannerDelta]

Anyone up for playing some Campaign missions co-op?

[Xydarc]

I was a huge fan of the original RA, but this just doesn't do it for me. It just doesn't feel the same in anyway. I played the first soviet mission and just had no desire to continue further; definitely wont be purchasing.
I agree. There's something off about the gameplay. The cutscenes are dead on though.

[Rogue_hunter]

The gameplay is exactly the same, it's just that RTS gameplay has changed in the 10+ years the series has been around. A tank rush no longer qualifies as strategy. Sadly, the series hasn't moved past that. Still, it's a fun, mindless diversion with quality camp cutscenes.

[MinorHero]

from what i've seen of RA3 that kind of brutal undertones have been replaced by stupid jokes and boobs...

I like stupid jokes AND boobs!

Huzzah its like they made a game with me in mind.

Now if I can pry myself away from fallout 3 I'll go out and buy this thing.

On topic though, I wanted to know how this game compares gameplay wise to C&C3? Is it faster or slower? Is there more micromanaging of units or is it general army stuff?

[Xydarc]

I think I know what's off about it: the AI co-op. For me, the C&C games have always been about you in control. Now, I have to share a map with an idiot who can only attack, otherwise just sitting there getting plinked at.

I loved C&C3 and its expansion. RA3, except for the cutscenes, is a disappointment.

[ClannerDelta]

I think I know what's off about it: the AI co-op. For me, the C&C games have always been about you in control. Now, I have to share a map with an idiot who can only attack, otherwise just sitting there getting plinked at.

I loved C&C3 and its expansion. RA3, except for the cutscenes, is a disappointment.

I played through most of the Soviet campaign with a co-op partner and it was a hell of a lot more fun than the vanilla co-commander.

As for someones question about how it compares to C&C3? It's pretty much the same. Most units fill one or two roles that can be switched between as their special ability. You also have the same kind of weird competitive building strategies. Like using your MCV to crush a tank rush.

[Xydarc]

I played through most of the Soviet campaign with a co-op partner and it was a hell of a lot more fun than the vanilla co-commander.

As for someones question about how it compares to C&C3? It's pretty much the same. Most units fill one or two roles that can be switched between as their special ability. You also have the same kind of weird competitive building strategies. Like using your MCV to crush a tank rush.
I have no doubt co-op with a live human would be fun. However, if I'm playing single player in an RTS, I want to be in control of everything.

[ClannerDelta]

I have no doubt co-op with a live human would be fun. However, if I'm playing single player in an RTS, I want to be in control of everything.

I had no real problems with that in the Soviet/Allied campaign, but defending Pearl Harbor with that incompetent AI as the Empire... ugh. Way to spend $5000 of my money on infantrymen, when most of the fight centers on the ocean.

[Re3x]

I would have to agree with everyone and say that the gameplay is weird and just seems off. The casting for it is EPIC. They just need to do a show for RA instead of putting a game to it.

[ClannerDelta]

I would have to agree with everyone and say that the gameplay is weird and just seems off. The casting for it is EPIC. They just need to do a show for RA instead of putting a game to it.

This, without the Allied over-the-top-campy-even-for-RA writer. Btw, is Zhana that woman from the Orbitz gum commercials?

[Sonic Alpha]

I had no real problems with that in the Soviet/Allied campaign, but defending Pearl Harbor with that incompetent AI as the Empire... ugh. Way to spend $5000 of my money on infantrymen, when most of the fight centers on the ocean.

I've only just started playing through the soviet campaign, and have just completed the mission where you first go up against the Allies.

I didn't even get a chance to do anything, the AI just swarmed through the map; even after I told it to gather troops at a certain point and just sit there.

That zapped the fun right out of the mission for me :mad: