IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Something i don't Understand..
GDIZOCOM
post 19 Jul 2009, 13:49
Post #1


Level 17.4
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 763
Joined: 12 June 2009
Member No.: 131
Immaturity Incarnate



Why are people saying they want Westwood games back even though EA has good games?(in my opinion)


--------------------


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MARS
post 19 Jul 2009, 13:57
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Project Leader
Posts: 5870
Joined: 2 June 2009
Member No.: 10



QUOTE
(in my opinion)


You just answered your own question. Some people are of the opinion that Westwood made the better C&C games and quite frankly, I agree with them up until RA2. In YR, the EA influence became somewhat apparent, Generals, the best C&C game EA ever made was hardly even acknowledged by its publisher until recently and from that point onwards, well, let's not talk about that. It's a matter of personal taste. Younger players seem to prefer the newer games because 'the old ones have shitty graphics' while older players prefer the Westwood games because they feel that EA didn't do justice to the series' legacy somehow.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Soho
post 19 Jul 2009, 14:40
Post #3



Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 72
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Serbia
Member No.: 69



QUOTE (Pal @ 19 Jul 2009, 11:49) *
even though EA has good games?


Sure unsure.gif


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DELETED MEMBER
post 19 Jul 2009, 14:50
Post #4


BANNED
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 728
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Spain
Member No.: 48



I am not going to say Rayburn is wrong, but i want to add is also because....well, there are not more C&C to really compared how good westwood would have made them, so because they were the original creators many fans put them close to Godhood


this do happen with other companies and games throught


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MARS
post 19 Jul 2009, 15:09
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Project Leader
Posts: 5870
Joined: 2 June 2009
Member No.: 10



I wouldn't say that Westwood did a god-like job either, personally. The map design in TD and RA1 was severely lacking in my opinion. All the locations
looked pretty much identical which made the whole thing rather repetitive. I still prefer the WW games in terms of style, story and mood, though.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RaiDK
post 19 Jul 2009, 16:15
Post #6


GAAAAAAAAAIKIIIIIIIIING!
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 215
Joined: 7 June 2009
Member No.: 68



People for some reason see WW as a god studio. Petroglyph is basically the new Westwood now, Universe at War wasn't too bad from memory.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DELETED MEMBER
post 19 Jul 2009, 16:18
Post #7


BANNED
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 728
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Spain
Member No.: 48



QUOTE (Rayburn @ 19 Jul 2009, 13:09) *
I wouldn't say that Westwood did a god-like job either, personally. The map design in TD and RA1 was severely lacking in my opinion. All the locations
looked pretty much identical which made the whole thing rather repetitive. I still prefer the WW games in terms of style, story and mood, though.


Of course i should added "some people..." to my post

and well.....red alert 1 was everything except balanced in my opinion


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shock
post 19 Jul 2009, 21:14
Post #8


Forum Green
Group Icon

Group: Legend
Posts: 1350
Joined: 4 June 2009
From: Netherlands
Member No.: 17
Projects: SWR Productions



QUOTE (RaiDK @ 19 Jul 2009, 14:15) *
People for some reason see WW as a god studio. Petroglyph is basically the new Westwood now, Universe at War wasn't too bad from memory.

Universe at War wasn't bad, but it was way too ambitious to really become a good game.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Overdose
post 20 Jul 2009, 5:18
Post #9


Hardly Diplomatic
Group Icon

Group: Legend
Posts: 1468
Joined: 31 May 2009
From: Brazil
Member No.: 4
Projects: Retired



EA used to make good games too. Road Rash, General Chaos, Populous, the old Fifa games (94-96) among others. Problem is that they can't do good new games, all they do is sequels. The only new thing they came up with was Spore but you get tired of that game pretty quickly. It will also be milked to death like Sims.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NergiZed
post 20 Jul 2009, 14:16
Post #10



Group Icon

Group: Dev. Team
Posts: 1220
Joined: 8 June 2009
From: East Coast of either China or the US
Member No.: 96
Projects: SWR Productions



QUOTE (Overdose @ 20 Jul 2009, 9:18) *
EA used to make good games too. Road Rash, General Chaos, Populous, the old Fifa games (94-96) among others. Problem is that they can't do good new games, all they do is sequels. The only new thing they came up with was Spore but you get tired of that game pretty quickly. It will also be milked to death like Sims.

So true...

Sequel spam is one of the more pressing issues for EA (and especially the CnC series) IMO. Sequel Spam is what killed Need for Speed, and I would really rather not see that happen to CnC as well.

EA needs to concentrate on making games that last, both on it's power initially and let a good community get established in order to back it's games in the long run.

None of the games EA makes these days will ever become 'classics' because they aren't particularly groundbreaking and there's a sequel 12 months down the line.

This post has been edited by NergiZed: 20 Jul 2009, 14:17


--------------------

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DELETED MEMBER
post 20 Jul 2009, 15:17
Post #11


BANNED
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 728
Joined: 7 June 2009
From: Spain
Member No.: 48



QUOTE (Overdose @ 20 Jul 2009, 3:18) *
EA used to make good games too.
Populous


Populous was from bullfrog

also
QUOTE
The only new thing they came up with was Spore but you get tired of that game pretty quickly. It will also be milked to death like Sims.


Dead Space, Mirror's Edge and the future Dante's Inferno don't count?


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shiro
post 20 Jul 2009, 15:27
Post #12


Gamer Girl
Group Icon

Group: Legend
Posts: 3808
Joined: 19 June 2009
From: Disboard
Member No.: 182
Friendly Freelancer



Dead Space was the solely good EA game I ever played so far.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Overdose
post 20 Jul 2009, 16:01
Post #13


Hardly Diplomatic
Group Icon

Group: Legend
Posts: 1468
Joined: 31 May 2009
From: Brazil
Member No.: 4
Projects: Retired



You are correct Populous was from Bullfrog which got swallowed up by EA like Westwood did.

I haven't played Dead space yet.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The_Hunter
post 20 Jul 2009, 16:14
Post #14



Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 5732
Joined: 31 May 2009
From: The Netherlands
Member No.: 1
Projects: SWR Productions
Bitch slapping SAGE since 2003



You also have to take in account that you cannot generalize EA as a whole since they have different studios and developers too (as in EA that developed the C&C games = not the same as EA that developed Dead Space for one).

Ironicly tho i got myself Dead Space a few days ago must say that sofar i found it quite a entertaining game.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28 April 2024 - 4:20