Command and Conquer Generals

Kevin Tomaya writes: "GameSpot has posted a really in-depth story about a brand new Command and Conquer game that is in all 3D. It's called C&C Generals and has the US and China fighting against a terrorist organization. The article is like that Metal Gear Solid 2 story they did last year. It takes you through the whole genesis of the project and introduces the development team."

Comments

Westwood and Gamespot fake screenshots

[SMN]

I hate to break it to you, but Westwood has a history of faking development screenshots and lying about what features have already been implemented. They did it for Tiberian Sun and they did it for Renegade, and all of the gaming magazines and websites (including Gamespot) will happily fall for it when they get a chance to have "exclusive" news. And the poor saps reading this probably won't realize they've been duped until it takes 4 years for the game to come out (Renegade) or the final version of the game has inferior graphics and fewer features than the article says WW has _already_ developed (Tiberian Sun). I'll believe this when I see it.

Re:Westwood and Gamespot fake screenshots

[Anonymous Coward]

Believe me when I say I can see your point of view. However, here is why I disagree with you:

1. Unreal Tournament looks better. True it has no weather effects. True inside/outside levels that look decent were created by users well after the game was released. Even UNREAL had a beautifully designed inside/outside detail. I am sure that renegade will look better as it gets older.

2. Giants Citizen Kabuto. Scale was huge for terrain small for buildings, but it would be possible to scale down the land and increase the building scale without much performance loss/ if not gain.

3.CounterStrike Ok so it may be hard to compare with the MOD that redefined gaming and sold copies of half-life through the roof, breaking all sorts of records. Oh, but wait that was three years ago. Today Westwood states that renegade is to have state of the art graphics. I believe that they have some state of the art graphical features, but that is about it.

Not that westwood would have known my vision for the game, or should they have cared. What I envisioned before I played the demo was not, for example with GDI Barracks, to go into a basically empty rectangle building with some texturing on the walls, yet instead to see maybe some bunk beds, etc. Ala COUNTERSTRIKE. I could care less how big their structures were I think they are of good & reasonable size and scaled well to the original game. I just would have liked to see a bit more detail inside the buildings. Even for multi player.

Thanks for your discussion,
DW

Another one in a good series..

[NeoCode]

If anyone remembers, and if I can recall correctly, this started with a story they did on Black and White. I loved the piece they did on B&W. It not only told a lot about the game but also about what exactly goes on behind the scenes. The 3D model, the music, the graphics, artwork, debugging and so on.

I think that was by far the most entertaining of all. So much so that after I read the article, the next day I bought the game. First reason was that I wanted to see how B&W played and second was that I wanted to support the developers' hard work. And it was well worth it.

These articles give an in-depth view of the development process so you can relate to it and hopefully come to appreciate the game even better. I hope they keep doing it.

Keep it real or don't. Don't go halfway....

[tickleboy2]

I've been a fan of C&C games since the start, but I was slightly disappointed with Red Alert 2. Here you have a great game with great units until you can start building mind controlled dolphins and squids! I'm sorry but I'm surprised that the developer that created these units didn't get laughed out of the design meeting. The secret is, either keep the game moderatedly realistic, or don't. The first C&C game was great because most of the units were realistic, and then there were a couple of units that were just a little far fetched (cloking tank, Ion cannon). Instead of using these so called fantasy units, why don't they focus on some new weapons that we might actually see in the future? For example: Star Wars, Missle Defence, etc. But I also enjoy the so called "fantasy" games like Starcraft, but here they didn't incorporate any realisim into the game. So Westwood, please do us a favor and do one or the other, but don't do both!

This game is being rushed.

[Anonymous Coward]

After reading the entire article, they keep bringing about the point that they are tyring to RUSH this game out the door before the end of the year.

This Scares Me.

Imbalances, Almost zero beta testing time. Sure they got the engine, but with a TIGHT design schedule, i'm expecting nothing reveloutionary for the C&C series besides the graphics overhaul.

With there tight pressed schedule they even said they couldent fit in some of the stuff they wanted to, so what would make this game any different than any other C&C game besides the graphics overhaul?

I'm skeptic.

Re:Credit to game programmers

[Geoff Keighley]

As the author of the article I wanted to briefly comment on this post. I certainly try to give credit where credit is due -- In the case of the C&C Generals article, I ended up interviewing about 12 people on the team of 40. Not 100% of the team, but keep in mind that 40 is a pretty large team. On a smaller project like Black & White (team of about 12 key people) it's easier to speak with everyone.

Most of the key people were interviewed and shown in photos, even if they weren't the main focus of the story. (i.e. the terrain was created by Todd Williams, who is quoted in the story and his picture is shown). Keep in mind that I'm not always given access to everyone on a game development team. When I was in Tokyo for Metal Gear Solid 2, I was only allowed to speak with the most senior people on the team, all programmers/designers/artists who had worked with Mr. Kojima for over a decade. Companies aren't always willing to put every employee in front of the press.

However, I would like to say that I've failed with the article if you feel I've reduced the "efforts of an entire team...to one person's efforts." Yes, Skaggs and Bonin are quoted frequently, but that is to maintain some consistency throughout the piece. As a narrative endeavor I have to have some common themes running through the story, and after all, Skaggs and Bonin are the heads of the project. Yet I also tried very hard to at least recognize the efforts of the other key individuals on the team, such as Alhquist (game editor) and all the designers, key artists, etc.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.