Nyerguds Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 I understand. Then you go and create something out of "thin air" like the new side colors for units & buildings..? Actually, that one kinda grew from removing the Funpark mode. To remove Funpark, I had to create a bunch of extra systems to allow me to add the minicampaign to the New Missions list. Because, well, I wanted to get rid of the horribly buggy special game mode, but not at the cost of actually losing the awesome dinosaurs minicampaign. Those systems were: -The minicampaign system itself, that allows one entry in the New Missions list to be a campaign up to 15 missions (using the EA-EB-EC-ED etc. alternate choices as next missions) -The custom colour changing system, to allow both the GDI and Nod version of the Funpark campaign to have silver colour ingame, despite technically simply being GDI and Nod -the custom radar logo, to give the player the JP logo -a logic for skipping the score screen The extra colours were nothing more than a very small addition to the added custom colour changing system. I didn't even manage to make them usable in multiplayer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riseofbane Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 you could still said it would be technically difficult to apply A10 in beginning.. disingenious. just because Westwood didn't implement it, does not mean it will cause problem in game balance or game tactic (not talking about technical issue caused by the change) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattAttack Posted July 25, 2013 Share Posted July 25, 2013 wow.. I can't believe this discussion is still going on.... unless someone else will do the crazy ass work to implement this, LET IT GO!! I feel that Westwood really got it 95% right when they threw this thing together. Sure the Airstrike is underpowered when it comes to multiplay, but I'm sure it's like that for a reason. After experiencing undeployable MCV's and auto-crush infantry options I feel confident in saying that THEY SUCK!!! There's a reason why that crap never made it in the friggin game!! I know Nyerguds can be sort of condescending in some of his replies, BUT WE OWE ALL OF THIS TO HIM!! There are things I disagree with him on too, but I still have mad respect that he breathed life back into a game I love. Sorry but I've grown irritated by what a childish retard-like internet fight this has become. sheesh! I may be overreacting, but I'm pretty sleep deprived and annoyed in general anyways-- I try to do my part in nurturing this whole c&c scene but.. UGH.. BLEAAARGH!!! p.s. this is not directed at anyone or perhaps it is directed at everyone, but CHILL THE F*UCK OUT!!! Unity my fellow C&C-tards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nyerguds Posted July 29, 2013 Share Posted July 29, 2013 you could still said it would be technically difficult to apply A10 in beginning.. disingenious. just because Westwood didn't implement it, does not mean it will cause problem in game balance or game tactic (not talking about technical issue caused by the change) ANYTHING that "Westwood didn't implement" is technically difficult to apply. The very statement that "Westwood didn't implement it" sufficiently implies that, since it means there isn't a byte of code for it already present inside the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now