I'm putting this in General gaming for a reason 5 replies

Please wait...

Exploder

Flames on fire?

50 XP

14th February 2004

0 Uploads

4,357 Posts

0 Threads

#1 14 years ago

I'm gonna start a debate on why would C&C: RA2 be better than Generals and why would those say "EA ruined the C&C series" Here's my 17 reasons why Generals and ZH is better: 1.Better graphics 2.Better weapon sounds(Except machine gun sounds that suck) 3.Better unit voices 4.Can build structures ANYWHERE! (With a few exceptions of course) 5.Can build more than one SW 6.Can make use of more than one barracks/war factory and make more than one unit at a time 7.Opening cutscenes(NOT the loading screens!) for the campaign missions is nicer than in RA2 8.General abilities 9.The sides are MUCH more well balanced than in RA2 10.Upgrades(Well, it does have advantages and disadvantages) 11.In Zero Hour, Challenge campaign pretty cool 12.Wider modding capabilities 13.Your custom maps can be made into ANY way you want it to be(That is, can have infinite money, indestructible tech structures etc and other coding capabilities that were impossible to make in RA2 maps) 14.I doubt you could make or download custom SP maps in RA2. 15.In Zero Hour, there's 12 sides(Actually really 3, with 3 generals for each faction using different tactics) 16.Better unit animations 17.In RA2 and YR, only standard infantry could garrison buildings. Now, all sorts of infantry(With a few exceptions) can garrison civilain buildings Of course, RA2 and YR do have certain advantages over Generals, like 1.Better story 2.Has navy 3.Can capture buildings faster and easier 4.Has walls However, the advantages are definitely more than enough to outweigh the weaknesses. Consider all those advantages that Generals has over RA2, I will say that anybody that says "EA ruined C&C" are just DOWNRIGHT IDIOTS. Now, thats not to say that RA2 and YR sucked, I enjoyed them alot before Generals existed. Now any RA2 fan come and take your best shot on saying how RA2 is better.




Ensign Riles VIP Member

No! I'm Spamacus!

426,516 XP

17th June 2003

0 Uploads

39,479 Posts

1 Threads

#2 14 years ago

You don't let anyone dislike EA games do you?




qotsa

Proceeds the Weedian

50 XP

24th November 2003

0 Uploads

7,424 Posts

0 Threads

#3 14 years ago

ExploderI'm gonna start a debate on why would C&C: RA2 be better than Generals and why would those say "EA ruined the C&C series"

Here's my 17 reasons why Generals and ZH is better:

1.Better graphics 2.Better weapon sounds(Except machine gun sounds that suck) 3.Better unit voices 4.Can build structures ANYWHERE! (With a few exceptions of course) 5.Can build more than one SW 6.Can make use of more than one barracks/war factory and make more than one unit at a time 7.Opening cutscenes(NOT the loading screens!) for the campaign missions is nicer than in RA2 8.General abilities 9.The sides are MUCH more well balanced than in RA2 10.Upgrades(Well, it does have advantages and disadvantages) 11.In Zero Hour, Challenge campaign pretty cool 12.Wider modding capabilities 13.Your custom maps can be made into ANY way you want it to be(That is, can have infinite money, indestructible tech structures etc and other coding capabilities that were impossible to make in RA2 maps) 14.I doubt you could make or download custom SP maps in RA2. 15.In Zero Hour, there's 12 sides(Actually really 3, with 3 generals for each faction using different tactics) 16.Better unit animations 17.In RA2 and YR, only standard infantry could garrison buildings. Now, all sorts of infantry(With a few exceptions) can garrison civilain buildings

Of course, RA2 and YR do have certain advantages over Generals, like

1.Better story 2.Has navy 3.Can capture buildings faster and easier 4.Has walls

However, the advantages are definitely more than enough to outweigh the weaknesses. Consider all those advantages that Generals has over RA2, I will say that anybody that says "EA ruined C&C" are just DOWNRIGHT IDIOTS.

Now, thats not to say that RA2 and YR sucked, I enjoyed them alot before Generals existed.

Now any RA2 fan come and take your best shot on saying how RA2 is better.

I like ZH as well,so i guess u won't have to argue with me.




zezen

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

9th August 2004

0 Uploads

152 Posts

0 Threads

#4 14 years ago

The only kind of arguement i can come up with is RA2 is alot more original than Generals. With some well thought out units that i hadn't seen the likes of in a rts before where as generals seems to be a cut and paste of all the C&C games with the inclusion of modern day terrorism.




Disconnecting

Gone

50 XP

23rd March 2004

0 Uploads

745 Posts

0 Threads

#5 14 years ago

RA2 doesnt deserve a cnc title.




Mr. Matt VIP Member

#BanRadioActiveLobster

357,014 XP

17th June 2002

7 Uploads

33,696 Posts

780 Threads

#6 14 years ago

Persistent, aren't you? Perhaps consistent is a better word, as I'm not quite sure what he's trying to accomplish with his persistence... Oh, 'DOWNRIGHT IDIOTS' is flaming, by the way.