Jump to content

CnCNet Forums

Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Grant

Remaster Update - First Art Preview

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, cn2mc said:

chem, I wasn't debating this with you, but I acknowledge your opinion and I fully understand why something with the aesthetics of a child's toy appeals to you. 

Who else thinks it looks like a toy?

I think the original looks more like a toy than this one does this looks more gritty and realistic to me when compared with the original!?

Its slightly unfortunate that the pivot points of the crane look like screws I admit, but you wont even notice it in game, I would have thought its a non issue pedantic stuff and overall it looks great and more gritty than the original building not to mention better looking,/more aesthetically pleasing?

I mean  a lot of cnc1 looks a little toy like it is a game for boys, the mammoth tank looks like a toy, a rather cool toy, the HON, the airstrip, flame tank, orca, obelisk, temple, etc its IS a child's game! Not an adult war simulator!

Cn2mc you said you wanted it kept in theme with the original and that's exactly what they have done now you complain its not more adult themed. That doesn't make any sense.

 

 

Edited by chem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 5/7/2019 at 11:44 AM, chem said:

Who else thinks it looks like a toy?

If you actually take time to read the threads you post in, you'd find many of the answers to the redundant questions you keep asking. I'm not your secretary or personal aide, do some reading. And some growing up. As I already said, you are completely entitled to have poor taste and I don't intend to debate this with you.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎5‎/‎9‎/‎2019 at 1:43 AM, cn2mc said:

 

If you actually take time to read the threads you post in, you'd find many of the answers to the redundant questions you keep asking. I'm not your secretary or personal aide, do some reading. And some growing up. As I already said, you are completely entitled to have poor taste and I don't intend to debate this with you.

No you just want to avoid addressing the points because you are contradicting yourself.

You do realise the original cnc is a game made for boys like playing toy soldiers just on a computer instead of with models? Sure some adult fully grown men play with toy soldiers and build toy tanks etc but those toys and this game was intended for boys from the 90's era and many of the units  look like toys.

You also said you wanted it to stay as close to the original as possible. Its doing that by keeping it looking like the original which IS toy like.

So what do you want?  An adult themed war simulator? (because that isn't close to the original cnc1)

Edited by chem
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The screws do make it look like a toy. The buildings in the original games does have a little bit of comical architecture (temple of nod resembling a scorpion, hand of nod showing a hand squeezing the Earth) but at least they still look like freaking buildings, not having screws and rivet bolts fastened into them!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont see a toy right there, i see an absolutely serious looking mcv, only in high graphics. A "toy" would look like in RA3, but thats obviously not the case. And i dont care much for that stuff, i just want that they stick to:

a) 1 Engineer + apc as we know it in TD

b) 4 Helis as we know it in TD

c) Units are the same as in TD - NO changes, but maybe some additional units (wolverine and cyborgs?)

d)  !!! CHANGE HARVS TO HIGH IQ HARVS WITH HIGH REACTION TIME !!!

e) Make the "t" buttom available, just like in TS, to select any unit of the seleted unit's group in range of the selected unit

f) Make sure we can select an higher amount of units/buildings to be built.

g) An easy map creator, to make high tib maps

h) Let the game be as it was! No C&C 4 failure intended please!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, there is comical architecture in the original C&C, but this is more comical, there are toy-like units and buildings in C&C, but this is much, much more toy-like. Instead of using the new hardware possibilities to make it look more gritty and realistic, which was what the original obviously tried to do with the pixels it had to work with, they are now going for a more toy-like look. This my main point. My secondary, subjective argument, since we all know that appreciation of art is a subjective matter, is that I believe this to be a wrong artistic choice that unnecessarily deviates from the original. Many people seem to like it and I hardly mind that. What I do mind is people saying we should basically accept whatever EA throws out at us without criticism. And I'm not debating people's taste. I'm repeating this (and my entire bloody argument) for the third and final time, specifically for chem, who either can't or refuses to read my previous posts in this thread.

Where do I contradict myself in any of this, chem? Also, if you really believe what you're saying, about C&C being meant for kids, you might want to check some statistics, like what the average age of gamers was in the mid 90's and what it is today, who owned the majority of PCs back then, how much home computers did people have across the world, what demographic used to spend and still spends the biggest amount of money on games, etc. Sure. Kids can play C&C, I was 9 when it came out and I first played the DOS version at a friends house. But in reality it is a family game, broadly targeted at both kids and their parents, who do the actual spending. And this is also obvious by the fact that they took a whole lot of time to make the setting, story and graphics convincing enough. This is not convincing at all. Neither is your argument, so just drop it. 

In the end, this is a piece of arguably bad promotional eye-candy and, in reality, how the game would play and feel and what changes will be made under the hood is much more important than art. Unfortunately we're not hearing anything about that. I hope the effort on that front is closer to the original and more concentrated than in the artistic department. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, cn2mc said:

Yes, there is comical architecture in the original C&C, but this is more comical, there are toy-like units and buildings in C&C, but this is much, much more toy-like. Instead of using the new hardware possibilities to make it look more gritty and realistic, which was what the original obviously tried to do with the pixels it had to work with, they are now going for a more toy-like look. This my main point. My secondary, subjective argument, since we all know that appreciation of art is a subjective matter, is that I believe this to be a wrong artistic choice that unnecessarily deviates from the original. Many people seem to like it and I hardly mind that. What I do mind is people saying we should basically accept whatever EA throws out at us without criticism. And I'm not debating people's taste. I'm repeating this (and my entire bloody argument) for the third and final time, specifically for chem, who either can't or refuses to read my previous posts in this thread.

Where do I contradict myself in any of this, chem? Also, if you really believe what you're saying, about C&C being meant for kids, you might want to check some statistics, like what the average age of gamers was in the mid 90's and what it is today, who owned the majority of PCs back then, how much home computers did people have across the world, what demographic used to spend and still spends the biggest amount of money on games, etc. Sure. Kids can play C&C, I was 9 when it came out and I first played the DOS version at a friends house. But in reality it is a family game, broadly targeted at both kids and their parents, who do the actual spending. And this is also obvious by the fact that they took a whole lot of time to make the setting, story and graphics convincing enough. This is not convincing at all. Neither is your argument, so just drop it. 

In the end, this is a piece of arguably bad promotional eye-candy and, in reality, how the game would play and feel and what changes will be made under the hood is much more important than art. Unfortunately we're not hearing anything about that. I hope the effort on that front is closer to the original and more concentrated than in the artistic department. 

Well again you say you want it both gritty and as close to the original as possible, well the original isn't gritty its cartoon and toy like, so that's the contradiction. 

You say they were trying to make it look realistic and gritty but you don't know what their intentions were, those are probably your intentions, that's what you want for the remaster. 

But then you also said keep it as close to the original as possible. So again that doesn't make sense.

Even with the few pixels they had which does tend to make things look cartoony they clearly made mammoth tanks, flame tanks, obelisks, temples, Mobius etc I would argue that they were not trying to be gritty (in total only in parts) but entertaining.

I disagree that it looks  less gritty, with the extra detail it cant help but look more gritty almost, and less cartoon like, again barring those screws.

 

 

Edited by chem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still see no inner contradiction in my argument. If anything, I'm contradicting your subjective opinion on TD's original art and I stand by mine, but this is not a philosophical debate on the nature of perception. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am agreeing with cn2mc on this one regarding the "they worked with the pixels they had" and "they tried to make it look gritty".
Those where awesome graphics in those days.

If they try it now. They should not make it look like a dirtied toy. :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, cn2mc said:

I still see no inner contradiction in my argument. If anything, I'm contradicting your subjective opinion on TD's original art and I stand by mine, but this is not a philosophical debate on the nature of perception. 

"Instead of using the new hardware possibilities to make it look more gritty and realistic, which was what the original obviously tried to do with the pixels it had to work with"

 

That means you think westwood making flame tanks, dr Mobius, temple, hon, the airstrip, bike, obelisks, stealth tank, missile tower, refinery, mammoth tank, commando etc was westwood trying to be gritty. 

They could do grit with those few pixels see the A10, apache, med tank mrls, barracks,  buggies etc, they chose to make it fun entertaining childish toy like cartoon like and so on.

Edited by chem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, X3M said:

I am agreeing with cn2mc on this one regarding the "they worked with the pixels they had" and "they tried to make it look gritty".
Those where awesome graphics in those days.

If they try it now. They should not make it look like a dirtied toy. :)

I disagree it was intended to be a Hodge podge of grit and comic like art , just like when you read a comic book you may see a realistic looking helicopter in the art work but also their will be a giant robot or something trying to knock it out of the sky.  That's my guess as to what their intentions were with regards to grit/realism. Sure they will try to make the robot or whatever look realistic but its still a freaking robot or hand of nod or whatever, and there will be that stark difference between the fantasy comic book like units and structures (of which cnc has a load of) and the real military equipment (which cnc has less of).  I believe this is intentional. Its almost comic book in style.

I think they should make it look more like the FMV as they add detail. :)

Edited by chem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

posted image

 

posted image

 

That is the true style of cnc1 if it were to become high in detail. Its shiny, aesthetic, high in fantasy,  like a comic book come to life through a games graphical engine. It is also realistic in parts like a hero style comic book, so gritty in parts too with real world military equipment along side the fantasy equipment.

Edited by chem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

https://youtu.be/uIkNxEKrAaU

 

Here's the FMV conyard, they have taken from it which is pleasing to see I love the glass/metal front especially gives a nostaligia feel along with the graphics update its like a x2 pleasure reward.

The crane looks very similar in fairness, the FMV crane has a triangle detailing at the pivot point

 

 

 

Edited by chem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

posted image

Here is the realistic gritty part ie these are real military tanks.

 

Im so banned and restricted I cant edit my posts so I meant to say comic book like not cartoon like in response to cnc1,  so while there is the gritty real military style aspect to the game there are also the comic book like fantasy units and structures beside them and neither is the minority/majority. So it is like a comic book stylistically.

Edited by chem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a game with a obelisk death ray and magical, fully-crewed vehicles popping out of thin air. Guys with 'miniguns' can swarm and blow up vehicles or buildings, and one guy in coveralls and a hard hat can turn any building over to the other side because he runs in.

 

If you really want a gritty war simulator, go play World in Conflict or Wargame: European Escalation. That's a proper combat simulator, or ARMA. C&C is not 'gritty', it's a 1990s idea of post cold-war combat influenced by media at the time and little research.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, EatMyCar said:

It's a game with a obelisk death ray and magical, fully-crewed vehicles popping out of thin air. Guys with 'miniguns' can swarm and blow up vehicles or buildings, and one guy in coveralls and a hard hat can turn any building over to the other side because he runs in.

 

If you really want a gritty war simulator, go play World in Conflict or Wargame: European Escalation. That's a proper combat simulator, or ARMA. C&C is not 'gritty', it's a 1990s idea of post cold-war combat influenced by media at the time and little research.

Theatre of War 2 looks better imho

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EatMyCar, the thread is clearly about discussing art, not gameplay. 

chem, WW themselves have stated many times that they went for a modern warfare look during development in order to be more realistic and garner broader appeal. C&C was initially supposed to be a wizards and warriors game. Here's some good reading material: 

http://web.archive.org/web/20080215002613/http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=49038

https://funambulism.com/2014/08/15/a-metric-ton-of-my-old-command-conquer-interviews/

https://www.bennet.org/features/tiberian-origins/

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 9:30 AM, cn2mc said:

EatMyCar, the thread is clearly about discussing art, not gameplay. 

chem, WW themselves have stated many times that they went for a modern warfare look during development in order to be more realistic and garner broader appeal. C&C was initially supposed to be a wizards and warriors game. Here's some good reading material: 

http://web.archive.org/web/20080215002613/http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=49038

https://funambulism.com/2014/08/15/a-metric-ton-of-my-old-command-conquer-interviews/

https://www.bennet.org/features/tiberian-origins/

I have to say I think everyone wants the grit to remain including me, it is definitely part of the game, and I think EA will naturally want to make it less gritty, not intentionally but the art guys will have developed a way of doing things that is in the ra3/ra2 /cnc4 style, and they will probably unconsciously default to that style a little more than they should because they've developed a strong skillset in that style so it tends to bias the art to that style even when doing a new style , and I hope we don't lose any of the the grit or gulf war inspiration in the remaster.

Its the real military along side the sci fi that made this game very unique and pleasurable to play,  you get the enjoyment of modern military equipment and you get the enjoyment of near future or sci fi along side the real world gritty warfare. I hope that stays in the look of cnc1 remastered too.

Im happy with what they produced but I totally understand people who are worried it may go further towards cnc4 /ra3 style than it should. It cant hurt to sway EA a little bit more towards the gulf war inspiration of realistic and gritty modern warfare and less towards the toy/cnc4/ra3 style.

 

 

 

Edited by chem
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Zaccie94
      Similar to the Convert Operations expansion, Where the GDI & NOD emblems appear on structures like the con-yard & hand of NOD in convert ops. Make them appear especially to structures both factions share like the Power-plant, Refinery, Comm-center etc.. Just like in C&C3TW. Logos/Emblems were on "everything" which made it felt authentic to the factions. It'll benefit Online multiplayer making it easy for players to identify what faction that structure belongs to. This maybe a small detail but it could change the way the game feels & play in a positive true C&C way.
    • By 9LivesCatFood
      The past year a few of my old favorite games got their official servers shut down. No one plays those games online now. I know the C&C community will always find a way to play C&C online but do you think it woulda been good if these old C&C game servers shut down? Honestly I think so. Don't get me wrong it's nice to still be able to play these games online but I think it would have been "healthier" for the games to be shut down rather than be on life support until no one logs in anymore.
    • By Eisengeist
      I only got to play C&C Sole Survivor a little while before the servers went down and didn't get to try all its modes but it was pretty cool having every unit controlled by a player.   Plus some of the more elusive units made an appearance.   Isn't it the only game where you could play as a Viceroid, or at least the classic style Viceroid?  Hopefully it wouldn't be too big a project to build it into the remasters.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...