Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
SWR Productions Forum _ Games Discussion _ Act of Agression - New "CnC Generals"?!
Posted by: blgmgl 13 Mar 2015, 5:30
Just saw this trailer and it looks pretty good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfRqrxGQQg4
Do you have any more information on this game?
P.S. the music is lame!
Posted by: Sargeant Rho 13 Mar 2015, 9:23
There's a gameplay trailer for one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vefhZp-d_uw
Posted by: MARS 13 Mar 2015, 9:47
Having played the Wargame series, I am quite interested in this one as well, although I am curious as to how infantry combat is going to work out with retro RTS mechanics in what appears to be very large scale.
Posted by: Sargeant Rho 13 Mar 2015, 15:04
I hope it'll work somewhat like Act of War.
Posted by: XAttus 14 Mar 2015, 0:13
I've got Act of War on an original disk, found many fun hours in it... now this looks somewhat similar with familiar looks and features. I'm looking forward to this game.
And yes, Tank shells actually ripped apart infantry in Act of war however it was also good idea to stay away from AT guys as they were really effective against vehicles as well.
Posted by: Admiral FCS 14 Mar 2015, 6:54
It looks a little bit boxy... but at least not as cartoony as RA3 or, imo SC2. I guess I'll wait for more stuff to come out before judging anything.
Posted by: Thelord444 14 Mar 2015, 19:52
AWESOME!
Posted by: zourv 14 Mar 2015, 20:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vefhZp-d_uw&feature=player_profilepage
Posted by: Sargeant Rho 14 Mar 2015, 20:03
Already linked that in my first post in this thread 
Posted by: Basilisx 15 Mar 2015, 22:12
Looking forward to it, gameplay trailer looks promising. IIRC they want to release this spring and we are still in pre-alpha ? There was really a lack of information since the announcement in summer 2014, although I found a preview not long ago from an austrian game magazine and they revealed some pretty interesting features.
-Buildings in a Base are growing together by roads and paths, so that your base looks like a proper base and not just like some random placed buildings.
-No centralized economy: if you have an outpost with some warfactories, you have to send ressources there by yourself to keep it running, beware of ambushes and sneak attacks
-all units need gas and ammo to function
More info to come, I guess.
I love the Wargame series and I think Eugen will deliver a pretty interesting RTS for us. If someone wants to play some Red Dragon, let me know.
Posted by: Hecthor Doomhammer 19 Mar 2015, 1:34
I'm keeping my eyes on this one. and I have done so for quite a while
Posted by: The_Hunter 9 Apr 2015, 11:10
New trailer explaining the US faction 
Posted by: TimeBurner 9 Apr 2015, 11:41
Ahoy! de pirates ar wayting! Arr!
Posted by: Basilisx 9 Apr 2015, 18:23
I saw that trailer earlier today, I'm really excited to see the other 2 factions.
Posted by: The_Hunter 17 Apr 2015, 0:46
stumbled upon this interview today:
Some interesting information and also surprise surprise the devs were apparently big Generals fans
Posted by: Imperium 17 Apr 2015, 6:34
Im really excited since I was one of 10 people that actually loved AoW Direct Action. However, I also really hated RUSE/Wargame (very different cups of tea) and im worried some of those game will bleed into this one.
I was also a little disappointed about the factions. Heres to hoping they add more of them. The Cartel and U.N. are... well, they're so-so.
This all feels a bit too much like a re-treading of old ground. AoW:DA had the same structure; US Army, [Faction built around high tech high efficiency high cost units], [factioon built around low cost low efficiency units] only now the high tech guys are the antagonists.
Also kind of hate the name 'Cartel' for these people. Its both a little too similar to AoW's Consortium and a little hackneyed; I keep thinking of some drug dealing syndicate instead of PMCs.
We'll see. I really want this to be great and succeed honestly. The market for this kind of RTS is near dead, despite so many cnc players just being around.
Random reasources is interesting but also troubling. Its RNG gameplay, and hard to balance. It also begets the question, will there be a secondary economy, and to what extent is this primary economy going to be automatizable? If you need to micromanage multiple scanner teams to find resources every 3-4 minutes it will kill this game I fear.
Lets all also hope they focus on a macro heavy model here. Micro is all well and good but if they focus on micromanagement SC2 will have them beat. There have been a whole lot of real time tactical and micro heavy games lately. Bloody hell, what ever happened to base building.
As a final point, they had better not put in any sort of unit limit. None. Not even Act of War made that sin. If theres a unit limit outside of maybe a limit on commandoes and super-units, I'm bailing.
Posted by: vectorguy 18 Apr 2015, 0:40
Some interesting information and also surprise surprise the devs were apparently big Generals fans
Based on this interview and how long it takes to explain things I predict this game will never actually get released.
I hope it does though, looks interesting.
Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 18 Apr 2015, 4:19
The idea of being based on controlling logistics instead of telling tank#3 to hit the enemy on the LEFT then to drive 2 feet backwards is a BIG step forward in my books.
Posted by: Imperium 18 Apr 2015, 4:23
Agreed, definitely do not want a RTT game. I was just worried about having to babysit all of my resourcing operations instead of fighting battles
Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 18 Apr 2015, 6:06
Yeah, that's true, but APM and micro aren't really what you expect when you think of the genre, and honestly, the CNC style of strategy game is much better than the tired old "microfest". The cnc series went belly up because of retarded EA management and not being the national sport of Korea, not because of any deficencies in the style nor the games themselves (Beyond nod tending to be OP as fuck)
Posted by: Imperium 18 Apr 2015, 20:07
I agree with all of your points. I own both SC2 and SC2 HOTS but havent played either in a year or so precisely because I found the multiplayer distasteful.
Surely you can give a little and perhaps nod that focusing TOO much on resource collection COULD (not necessarily will, i havent played Act of Aggression) hurt the game?
Posted by: Serialkillerwhale 18 Apr 2015, 21:29
True. Wasn't disagreeing that I found it a bit intimidating to have vulnerable convoys (Great, as if the stealth faction needed another edge).
Posted by: Adoge 20 Apr 2015, 4:34
Personally I'm really liking the overall design.
From what I can dig up through trawling through a lot of stuff
This is how the factions are designed
U.S (Heavy armour- ROTR's Russia, Red Alert Soviets, House Harkonnen etc.)
Cartel (No not Mexicans- The Cartel are the military-industrial complexes' private army basically. They combine prototypes from the U.S, China, Russia (there's a Koalition MSTA in their forces 
), South Africa and Sweden- and this is just from what we've seen.)
The Chimera (These guys are essentially a U.N. military task force minus the U.S, they have European, (a) South African and Russian units and there most likely will be other nations in there)
Despite some of the overlap, these factions seem pretty exciting and of course channel the Act of War factions:
U.S: U.S
Cartel: Consortium (Albeit the Cartel will be more high-tech)
Chimera: Task Force Talon (Albeit Chimera is more regular and doesn't use many- if any U.S weapons)
The Wiki has a lot more detail:
http://actofaggression.wikia.com/wiki/Act_of_Aggression_Wiki
Posted by: Basilisx 10 May 2015, 22:58
New webpage is up, I thought I let you guys know, if you have still interest in the game
http://www.actofaggression-game.com/
Also POW-system confirmed, similar to the side missions in Cold war crysis you can get extra cash by capturing enemy soldiers or vehicle crews after you blew up their vehicle.
Posted by: vectorguy 13 May 2015, 22:38
Woohoo! I'm in for the beta test of this, downloading now...
"We are happy to inform you that you have been selected to participate in the Act of Aggression VIP Beta, which will take place from Friday 15th to Sunday 17th."
I feel so...special1. Like VIP special.I'm not sure if the date range from Friday to Sunday means that's the period for online multiplayer or if the game can be played solo/skirmish.
1Now's about the time everyone else chimes in and says they're an AoA beta tester too but they're not such a lame noob to announce the fact.
Update: "This beta enables you to play multiplayer games only, and with only one faction: the US Army.
Three maps are available, one in 1vs1, one in 2vs2, and one in 2vs2 and 4 players FFA."
Oh great, I sense repeated legendary ass-kickings in my near future.
Posted by: Kris 17 May 2015, 11:14
Just got into the beta as well and my first impression so far is this:
-I'd take CoH and even Gen's in-your-face camera than what AoA has.
-Early game is slow and i mean really slow to the point even CoH and Starcraft 2 laughs at it.
-Resource management has too much micro for no solid reason other than "look cool" and "innovative".
-Aircrafts are godawful slow that even the B52's in C&C Generals were way faster than the F35 lightnings in this game.
...and lastly, Eugen really needs to STOP calling this as a "C&C Generals successor" or even linking it to the (now hibernating) C&C franchise. Infact, it's predecessor, Act of war felt more C&C-ish than this game.
Posted by: Die Hindenburg 17 May 2015, 11:59
-I'd take CoH and even Gen's in-your-face camera than what AoA has.
-Early game is slow and i mean really slow to the point even CoH and Starcraft 2 laughs at it.
-Resource management has too much micro for no solid reason other than "look cool" and "innovative".
-Aircrafts are godawful slow that even the B52's in C&C Generals were way faster than the F35 lightnings in this game.
...and lastly, Eugen really needs to STOP calling this as a "C&C Generals successor" or even linking it to the (now hibernating) C&C franchise. Infact, it's predecessor, Act of war felt more C&C-ish than this game.
WOW... thats pretty hard words you write and it seems the recourse system and some other parts are pointless, but this is an Beta, and they could still change these easily.
But yes Act of War was the last command and conquer that was well made (oh and you notice something?
)Act of Aggression tries a bit too much, but also is too similar to AOW, even the factions are almost carbon copies with different skin, but this can be a good thing actually. The factions are still much better visually than any other faction, as they atleast use real designs and not fictional crap.
Just the camo they use for the cartel is a bit too overdone looks to much like TRON. But the Cartel is interesting because its reminicient of that Peace Walker CIA group.
Posted by: Kris 17 May 2015, 19:42
Yeah, it's true that it's beta and they could still change alot of things. But regarding the resource mechanics, reading their forums seems i'm not the only one who thinks its way too overcomplicated and practically bogs down the game. Infact, even CoH's overcomplicated resource mechanics was more fluid and easier to pick up and learn compared to this..
Honestly, this is what i truly feel about Act of Agression; It tries way too hard to be C&C and Act of War at the same time. As for usage of 'real designs', well, they practically grabbed all the Wargames assets and shoved it into Act of agression. ~ 10/10 quality recycling.
Posted by: DELETED MEMBER 18 May 2015, 13:02
I am honestly confused, the mechanics are the same (some units just cost money, other also need aluminium and hight tech ones need rare metals, similar to units in CoH needing either manpower or a combination), the only slighly confusing thing is the placement of the refinery (it needs to cover the resources with its area, not the actual footprint) or the US building for rare metals i forgot the name off and rare metals and aluminium needing silos
so i dont get where the hell this overcomplicated think came from
i do agree planes are slow though specially with the map size
Posted by: Kris 18 May 2015, 23:38
so i dont get where the hell this overcomplicated think came from
The overcomplication came from the fact that while the resource networking was a good idea, on paper, it was badly executed in the actual game. They might as well call the game "Act of Resource Baby Sitting" or what a forumer said: "FedEx Logistic /Amazon Storage simulator".
Infact, even CoH's multiple resources were easier to pick up (from a casual perspective) and manage because once you chained them up those territories, everything goes full automatic and you don't need to manually set up different resource chains where trucks can actually get stuck or lost or even both.
Posted by: Kris 20 May 2015, 15:07
Gameplay + Honest criticism video of Act of Agression by Generals Gentlemen:
Just a gameplay video by VulcanHDGaming
Posted by: The_Hunter 10 Jun 2015, 11:52
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXCRk84A1WQ
They released the introduction trailer to the Chimera faction.
Posted by: Kommandant Karisse 10 Jun 2015, 13:24
Ooh ... the long-range cannons and power-providing HQ make me think of ECA, not to mention the exosuit infantry. They seem like a pretty sweet faction. c:
Posted by: Sargeant Rho 10 Jun 2015, 18:54
Chimera seems to be very close to the TFT in Act of War, without outright being the TFT, which is nice
Posted by: Adoge 11 Jun 2015, 0:47
I'm really looking forward to the Cartel.
Chimera and Cartel were the ones that really interested me while the US was more of a distraction.
i really like the idea behind the Cartel and their sort of Private Military/Corporatist. Personally I prefer this backstory to that of the Consortium. Noticeable also is that unlike the Consrtium, the Cartel are high-tech all the way. They don't have AK-47 soldiers and RPG teams (From what I understand at least).
Posted by: MARS 11 Jun 2015, 7:09
I must say, having observed this game for some time, I am growing just a little skeptical. It may still be a beta but something about the gameplay, just the way units move and behave rubs me the wrong way. I don't know, perhaps it's just me being too used to smaller scale, more tactical games like CoH these days but seeing this more arcady style of gameplay (where you never really micro a single unit but always throw around whole clusters of tanks and helicopters) rendered in modern realistic graphics just seems really jarring to me. There also seems to be something about the lighting and the overall visual language that looks off to me personally. The resource system seems to be trying too hard to be unique and becomes clunky in the process (how is that a throwback to '90s C&C style RTS'?), not to mention that seeing all these oil and crystal pits scattered around the landscape, often alligned in grid formations, just looks ugly to me. I reckon these are all pretty petty as far as complaints go and chances are I'll still give this game a try, but I'm not feeling very optimistic about it anymore but again, that's probably down to the fact that I really prefer games like CoH, whereas C&C style gameplay just feels kinda dated to me nowadays. The thing that I would like to see brought back/rebooted in C&C is -not- so much the gameplay as it is the scenarios actually.
Posted by: Die Hindenburg 11 Jun 2015, 16:05
Always the sceptical, MARS, or?
But yes they try a bit so much.
Posted by: Cracky 7 Jul 2015, 14:44
Obviously going to buy this one for my steam.
also
1. US Army
2. Cartel
3. Chimera
My personal ranks for the factions. Cartel was gonna be my #1 but it's high learning curve drove me away.
Posted by: Adoge 18 Jul 2015, 4:46
So the Open Beta's finally out and the Chimera and the US, as well as the game are looking good.
While I'm gonna hold off until the Cartel is added and then dive in, I'm really liking how it's looking and TotalBiscuit and others have really enjoyed it so far.
I was wondering if anyone else gave it a try and what their thoughts were?
Posted by: freeone3000 3 Aug 2015, 18:53
I've tried it. It's very resource-management-heavy. I expected something like Act of War or C&C Generals, but it doesn't play like either. It plays similar to Company of Heroes, but... worse.
Chimera infantry are significantly overpowered for their cost - they're a basic infantry unit that are *the best* anti-infantry infantry, to the point where other infantry can't even fire a shot before being killed. Bases can be captured immediately after game start by basic infantry (and, really, most infantry), meaning that if you're playing anything other than Chimera, you need static anti-infantry defenses throughout your base VERY early - and if you're Chimera, putting down a dude or two is good enough.
As soon as mechanized units are available, there's no reason to build more infantry. Infantry can no longer be stationed on top of buildings, and there's no crew-served weapons, which means that anti-tank in a building is limited to your standard rocket infantry. The lack of snipers means that buildings can't be "safely" taken, they have to be either captured or bombarded - again, Chimera wins here, because SEALs are required to go toe-to-toe with them, and SEALs require red blocks.
Right. Some things require red blocks. Some things require blue blocks. But you're not allowed to get the red blocks until you're fully tech'd up. You have to fully defend the red blocks, but you can't actually take them until you're tech level 3. It makes it a severe tech and resource management race, since the first person to the red blocks gets the best units.
Say you *do* have the red blocks, and everyone has red blocks. It turns into undifferentiated unit spam, since every faction has one spammable unit (their second-best one) that is linked to their infinite-resource-generation building. It's an awful design choice that turns everything into massed tank destruction, since there's no resource limitations. If games manage to get into late-game, you'll frequently see columns of sixty tanks hit each other and promptly explode.
Artillery has a much more limited role, and limited range.
In short, if you think Act of Aggression looks like something you want to play, but you really liked C&C Generals, you should be playing Act of War: Direct Action.
Posted by: Die Hindenburg 6 Aug 2015, 3:55
The only thing to critique is that all three factions have merican equipment, and two of them russian equipment. Too much merica there.
Posted by: MARS 6 Aug 2015, 6:10
Though from what I understand, the Cartel is made up of cancelled/stolen designs from other parts of the world. At least it isn't as extreme as it was with Act of War where one faction was the US and another was...the US but more high-tech.
Posted by: Die Hindenburg 6 Aug 2015, 14:58
Thats correct, but for chimera i wished they replaced the Valor helicopter, Crusher drone, and stinger/ATGM upgrades for some of their units with european or asian equivalents, of which there are many,
like the AW609 with is also a tiltrotor helicopter, and the Da Gou, a chinese copy of the LSSS drone. For the stingers i would replace them with Mistral, and HOT as ATGMs, and for the SAS sniper they could do it with the RT-20 as heavy AM rifle.
Posted by: Nasher660 6 Aug 2015, 20:00
Hmmm I like the look of the Cartel, I want to get my hands on them and have a play.
Cartel Faction Gameplay Video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-_VFnLAaak
Posted by: Kommandant Karisse 6 Aug 2015, 21:15
Some of their tech actually looks pretty cool. I don't like how unoriginal the concept is though.
Posted by: MARS 24 Oct 2015, 7:42
So I just tried my first skirmish game as USA vs Cartel and as hard as I'm trying to like the game - I can't, sorry.
First, even the smallest available map feels way too large with so much empty, unused terrain that travelling cross country is tedious. The scale, coupled with the intended zoom level already being too high, makes it difficult to identify units at a glance and takes away much of the spectacle. Tech progression seems like a total mess too, with you having to build countless buildings that seem to serve little purpose besides unlocking more and granting an upgrade or two. Games like CoH and ROTR are way better at this, having only a handful of buildings that you need which all retain an important function even after you have purchased their upgrades. The visual language of the base structures is also rather terrible. Everything has this generic realistic look to it which makes it difficult to tell structures apart. Sure, you can identify something like a refinery or a helipad but then you have all these bland looking tech and support buildings, multiple factories and others cluttering up your base that have no defining visual cues whatsoever. I also strongly dislike the resource system as it is time consuming and pointlessly micro-heavy. Having to constantly survey the map with some unit to find deposits of aluminium and rare earth (not a single bit of the latter actually appeared in my game even though I was searching high and low) is just downright bad design in my opinion because it places too much gameplay focus and player attention on something that should be much more straightforward. The battles meanwhile do feel sufficiently like old 90s RTS games in that, at least to me, it all feels really really dated. It all comes down to giant blobs colliding and wiping each other out rapidly based on what feels to be a very Starcrafty hard-counter system, which I personally don't like as it makes the game more about memorising counters of overspecialised units instead of managing them to their maximum effect. I will probably play some more later but for now, my skepticism about the game feels sadly justified.
Posted by: Die Hindenburg 25 Oct 2015, 1:19
First, even the smallest available map feels way too large with so much empty, unused terrain that travelling cross country is tedious. The scale, coupled with the intended zoom level already being too high, makes it difficult to identify units at a glance and takes away much of the spectacle. Tech progression seems like a total mess too, with you having to build countless buildings that seem to serve little purpose besides unlocking more and granting an upgrade or two. Games like CoH and ROTR are way better at this, having only a handful of buildings that you need which all retain an important function even after you have purchased their upgrades. The visual language of the base structures is also rather terrible. Everything has this generic realistic look to it which makes it difficult to tell structures apart. Sure, you can identify something like a refinery or a helipad but then you have all these bland looking tech and support buildings, multiple factories and others cluttering up your base that have no defining visual cues whatsoever. I also strongly dislike the resource system as it is time consuming and pointlessly micro-heavy. Having to constantly survey the map with some unit to find deposits of aluminium and rare earth (not a single bit of the latter actually appeared in my game even though I was searching high and low) is just downright bad design in my opinion because it places too much gameplay focus and player attention on something that should be much more straightforward. The battles meanwhile do feel sufficiently like old 90s RTS games in that, at least to me, it all feels really really dated. It all comes down to giant blobs colliding and wiping each other out rapidly based on what feels to be a very Starcrafty hard-counter system, which I personally don't like as it makes the game more about memorising counters of overspecialised units instead of managing them to their maximum effect. I will probably play some more later but for now, my skepticism about the game feels sadly justified.
Not to sound like a smarty, but i knew that even long before the game came out, that it would be that what, just by looking at the prelease screenshots.
Shame that all RTS are the same, tabletop games and plastic soldiers armies (always combine them with fire crackers to blow them up) always beat RTS/RTT anyway.
Posted by: __CrUsHeR 29 Oct 2015, 11:48
I was recently playing Act of Aggression; well, I expected a gameplay to flow more smoothly considering that the gameplay of Act of War was already a bit truncated; to my disappointment the Act of Agression missed at the dosage and difficult things in this regard even more. As the MARS said: the maps are huge and manage the resources and expand its base and map control is a mission worthy of the AoE, something that definitely does not suit with modern war RTS games in my opinion.
Occasionally you can find good battles in a skirmish at the cost of a sub-human micro-management (which I particularly dislike - at the least not in this extent), then I say that the game's ideas are good (as in the case of the Act of War), but the dose is exaggerated.
Posted by: Basilisx 12 Mar 2016, 17:15
As it seems, there is an update on the way for AoA that alters the gameplay massively. It seems to be much more in line with a potential spiritual successor to Generals.
I let you see for yourself:
http://forums.eugensystems.com/viewtopic.php?f=112&t=56830
Posted by: TimeBurner 13 Mar 2016, 12:08
This game barely lasted 1 hour in my computer after installing.
Posted by: The_Hunter 13 Mar 2016, 13:07
its nice that the developer makes an effort to do that but i'm not sure if it will do them much good in terms of the sales and what not.
It's a simple is that the first impression lasts.
Posted by: TimeBurner 13 Mar 2016, 15:19
Exactly! after all the hype about this being a successor to c&c and turned out to be a disappointment.The hype faded after a week,after the release.
Posted by: Kris 14 Mar 2016, 7:25
^^This!
Tell me about it, after the game went retail while still not feeling like the bragged about 'C&C successor' that was shown in the VIP beta, this game literally disappeared off the gaming radar.
Infact, i've actually forgotten that this game even existed 'till that news regarding the reboot edition was posted.
Overall, let's wait and see if this reboot edition will finally make it the C&C successor it should have been in the first place......or it would still be a another flop like the initial version.
Posted by: TimeBurner 14 Mar 2016, 12:01
I expect this to be just like when they added a new faction to Grey Goo. huehuehuehue
Posted by: The_Hunter 14 Mar 2016, 13:13
You guys do realise that the whole "Succesor to Generals" thing was created by yourselfs (and part of the online community) right ?
The developers never said anything like that they only said they'd make an old school style RTS with base building and resource gathering.
Those promises were delivered so stating they said anything else than that is a flat out lie.
Posted by: __CrUsHeR 14 Mar 2016, 13:45
The developers never said anything like that they only said they'd make an old school style RTS with base building and resource gathering.
Those promises were delivered so stating they said anything else than that is a flat out lie.
Maybe... but the producers know this expectation of "Successor to Generals" and has no interest in "demystify" this concept; remains for me to conclude that Eugen Systems expect to get the same success with a really similar game on the lines of Generals; a proof of this in my opinion is the box art of the game that is very similar to the Generals (coincidence?).
Posted by: TimeBurner 14 Mar 2016, 14:06
The developers never said anything like that they only said they'd make an old school style RTS with base building and resource gathering.
Those promises were delivered so stating they said anything else than that is a flat out lie.
...that is true. But,never have I seen anyone in this community,that anything will be better than generals,especially ROTR. .....Unless youuuu are hiding an HD version of ROTR with a new engine, higher poly models, and better path finding and keeping it to yourself. (Hunter playing secret ROTRHD during lunch breaks)
Posted by: The_Hunter 15 Mar 2016, 1:44
If you looked up the company history you will see that they never realy made a generalish game except for their very first one "Act of War" and even that one wasn't that close to generals.
Everything else they made after that were realy realistic strategy simulators with fuel, and ammo mechanics (Ruse, Wargame Serries) so i wasn't that suprised when this game came out and was nothing like generals at all.
Posted by: Kris 15 Mar 2016, 7:22
The developers never said anything like that they only said they'd make an old school style RTS with base building and resource gathering.
Those promises were delivered so stating they said anything else than that is a flat out lie.
They honestly shot themselves in the foot when they did the following:
1: "A return to the 90’s Golden Era of real time strategy games" - We know that the golden era was mostly dominated by C&C's, Warcraft or Starcraft, so people expected that kind of gameplay.
2: "I really like C&C Generals" - AoA producer
3: Most of their interviews mentioned and won't shut up about C&C games, especially our beloved C&C Generals.
4: From day one, they've wanted to make AoA play fast-paced and very smooth like C&C Generals which fueled the "Succesor to Generals" hype.
Check this out:
So, that hype of Act of Aggression being a successor of generals was NOT made by the community, if anything, Eugen themselves created it
Posted by: The_Hunter 15 Mar 2016, 12:56
Perhaps but they never litterly said "ITS GENERALS" and if you got yourself so hyped about that its pretty much your own fault regardless.
It was pretty clear from gameplay footage and the alpha that it was more like an old school RTS than anything we've had in recent times but certianly not exactly like it.
And the fact remains they never litterly said that it was like generals thats something the online community put into their mouths and no ammount of capslock and bold words is going to change that.
Posted by: Anubis 15 Mar 2016, 13:09
In the interview the developer says that he likes the pace of cnc generals not that he wants to redo cnc generals. In their public interviews and forums, they said they want to return to the old style RTS, of which command and conquer series is a part of. They also SPECIFICALLY SPECIFY that they DONT want to make a fast paces rts, but more of a slower pace one. The fact that they over did that with the overcomplicated economy is a sad thing. But they literally never said that they were gonna do an actual successor to the cnc series or specifically cnc generals. More than that - the community needs to get their heads out of their asses and understand that successor is not a fken copy of a game. That is called a HD edition. A successor means that the game uses the theme or elements of the game it successes but it doesn't go xerox on it. The fact that the community is incapable to understand simple terms, and in addition to that they create self-indulged hype about a certain game is in no way the fault of Eugene. That they somewhat indulged it and went with it in the hope of attracting as many clients as possible - it's frekin marketing. It's a sin to nature not to use stupidity against the stupid.
However, unlike most producers this days that just promise something and then releases it directly, Eugene actually offered people a BETA version. So for entire months people had the chance to play the game and see if they enjoy it or not. They made a game the way they considered to be cool and classic, and imo they managed exactly that. Sure the economy is kinda shitty and tbh i can't wait for the simplified version, but in terms of faction design, simplicity of micromanagement, unit variety, UI and just about anything you can come up with - this game shits on any cnc game or even act of war. And while act of war had an epic single player campaign, the basic factions it had with almost no unit variety, a to close to the infantry's buttchicks camera and overall rather limited faction design made it boring on the long term.
So in conclusion once again the gaming community proved it's full of brain dead morons. They said the game is not gonna be a fast paced one, but a classic slower style gameplay one - community complains it's slow. They said they wanna bring back a more complicated base management and economy - community complains it has to much base management and economy. They never once said it's suppose to be a successor to cnc games, but it wants to return to the classic rts days of cnc games - community understands that it's gonna be a cnc successor and should play exactly like - insert favorite cnc game. And then we wonder why producers ignore the community most of the time...
Posted by: Comr4de 15 Mar 2016, 18:35
This game never drew me in and it seems like I had a good hunch over it. Seems to me like nowadays people stick around the nostalgia card for too long and people never really know what they want until they have it or have lost it.
Posted by: Maelstrom 15 Mar 2016, 19:31
To be honest, I was waiting for a good RTS game, not really a successor to anything.
And it fits its role to a certain point (still in my opinion). The only thing I can see as a bad point is that the design of units and buildings care not clear enough. You can't tell which building is your barracks until you know the game quite well. Aside this, the game is pretty good.
Posted by: Kris 16 Mar 2016, 14:09
LET’S START #12 (REBOOT EDITION): BASE BUILDING
http://aoa.eugensystems.com/lets-start-12-base-building-reboot-edition/
Welcome back C&C Gens / Starcraft and AoW dozer - worker units
LET’S START #13 (REBOOT EDITION): NEW ECONOMY
http://aoa.eugensystems.com/lets-start-13-reboot-edition-economy/
New...or rather, welcome back to the combo of C&C style fixed resource spots and Act of war's oilfield resource system.
Posted by: Basilisx 21 Mar 2016, 14:47
Thanks for sharing these Infos, Kris.
Looking more and more like the game people expected from the beginning on.
Posted by: __CrUsHeR 21 Mar 2016, 16:28
That's what I'm looking for; something nostalgic, simple and enjoyable, the old formula of good old RTSs.
I begin to look in a different way this reboot edition.
Posted by: Basilisx 21 Mar 2016, 23:45
Let's see, maybe I will get it with the next sale on steam
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)