paul_of_arrakis Posted March 17, 2002 Author Share Posted March 17, 2002 Well i'm NOT greedy. I bought emp, and have played RA2. I still can't see y peeps still think RA2 is more addictive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardauker-Kirov Posted March 17, 2002 Share Posted March 17, 2002 I am greedy!!! Greedy i tell you!!! My mother was a Harkonnen! And my dad a Sovjet! oops.......I thought i was a Tayron.. *Looks around confused* :)Main Executer of Mother core is not Entertained! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunenewt Posted March 20, 2002 Share Posted March 20, 2002 i agree with Arbites getting crushed by a tank.ppl cant of played RA2:yr cuz the hero units r infantrynot that i prefer it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burseg_candor Posted March 21, 2002 Share Posted March 21, 2002 ra2 is more addictive in the beginning but it sorta dies in the middle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IxianMace Posted March 21, 2002 Share Posted March 21, 2002 Arbites, did you say that you have to use 'strategy' in RA2 to win? :O Here's what I did. I finished both campaigns on RA2 in 1 week!! With the allies, I just got 10 prism tanks, some IFVs, and repair IFVs, and that's it. Bye bye base!! ::) EBFD is MUCH more addictive than RA2, and the graphics make RA2 look like crap. The gameplay is much more engaging than RA2, and the campaigns are more interesting. EBFD is the game that requires more tactics (especially with House Ordos) if you compare it to RA2. When I was in the shop, I'm glad I chose Earth 2150 over RA2. I didn't play RA2 for long after I finished the campaigns, since the skirmish mode was so boring! I'm still playing Dune 2000 as well, that game has more fun in it than RA2. ::) EBFD is the best game that Westwood has ever made! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burseg_candor Posted March 21, 2002 Share Posted March 21, 2002 as of yet because pretty soon i heard theyre going to come out with a new command and conquer game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ligic_Tha_Master Posted March 21, 2002 Share Posted March 21, 2002 C&C: GeneralsBut it doesn't have NOD and GDI anymore... :'( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timenn Posted March 21, 2002 Share Posted March 21, 2002 Too bad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IxianMace Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 Actually, no offence to anyone, but the few C&C games that I've played have proved to be quite inept as far as gameplay and fun factor are concerned. C&C Tiberian Sun was completely boring, and RA2 turned out to be overrated.EBFD is the best!! Bi la kaifa!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timenn Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 Agree for RA2, but TS kicks ass. It was a whole new grapichal interface with real new ideas for units, like the subterrainean and the artillery (the first time a unit could outrange that much) and very interactive maps, with cities and lifeforms. And not to forget the first time there was difference in height on the map. No TS is a really good game... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ligic_Tha_Master Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 TS got so many NEW ideas. That's why it's so good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timenn Posted March 23, 2002 Share Posted March 23, 2002 The graphics are also better then RA2, especially those light effects, haven't seen them in RA2, nor in Emperor (too bad) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ligic_Tha_Master Posted March 23, 2002 Share Posted March 23, 2002 TS was ahead of its time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timenn Posted March 24, 2002 Share Posted March 24, 2002 And the Ion Storms were also an invention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardauker-Kirov Posted March 25, 2002 Share Posted March 25, 2002 The idea's are indeed cool. But i think both side's doesnt follow their weapon style a bit. GDI was a bit Ordos and Atreides mixed like.While the NOD has more of Destructive units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timenn Posted March 26, 2002 Share Posted March 26, 2002 No, GDI had powerful tanks, Atreides like, while NOD were guerilla with sneaky tactics/tanks (stealth) => Ordos..., but real evil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ligic_Tha_Master Posted March 26, 2002 Share Posted March 26, 2002 Point fo' timenn. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sardauker-Kirov Posted March 26, 2002 Share Posted March 26, 2002 Indeed *Claps his hands anime style*The big tank of Gdi rocks..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timenn Posted March 26, 2002 Share Posted March 26, 2002 The Titan was a very good tank, ok no AA, but much armor, not slow and good firepower, not vs infantery but those were not good. Except for Ghostalker and hijacker... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IxianMace Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 C&C Tiberian Sun got boring really quickly. You know those little twigs in the ground where the Tiberium pops out? It doesn't pop out fast enough (EBFD is so much better in this respect) so you run out of stuff to harvest quickly. The only thing I enjoyed about Tiberian Sun was the Disrupter tank, and the aircraft. Still, EBFD rocks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IxianMace Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 Another thing. What's the idea about the terrain deformation? The NOD artillery make craters in the ground so deep it's laughable sometimes. You can't save skirmish games (a big no no for RTS). I was on a skirmish game for 5 hours straight once, and I was NOD. I ended up on a high platform (my base was all paved out) because my artillery had pounded the crap out of all the units coming from all directions. ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timenn Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 That was corrected in one of the first patches. WW had underestimated the Artillery, they corrected it (the artilerry is no to weak, for my opinion) And the Tiberium didn't pop out to slow. It was good for the first time...And you can save with skirmish. Just download the patch... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aribites Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 Ixianmace, we all know that you LOVE Emperor:BFD, but some of the comments that you are making about ts are stupid..........i mean, you said that the craters made by artillery wer so deep that they were 'laughable'? Artillery do make big holes in the ground when they hit, or am I just a bit behind with modern day battlefield weapons systems..................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timenn Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 No, you're absolutely right. It is very realistic that heavy weapons make craters. That's also what I meant with interactive terrain... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Cheat_Lord Posted March 29, 2002 Share Posted March 29, 2002 I don't care about addiction. I change games every other month. Last I played was CS, before Yuri's Revenge, Ra2, FS, TS, Emperor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts