I do admit that they are cool.
- Revora Forums
- → Solais's Content
There have been 95 items by Solais (Search limited from 22-July 18)
It's the newspost that revealed the Foehn in the first place. The post mentioned that they don't want to commit the same mistake Westwood did with Yuri's Revenge, so Foehn will obviously get at least a 12 mission campaign.
It's not something you need ARES for, instead it is a tileset problem... though technically it is possible to use current tilesets and lighting smart ways to create missions that feel like taking place inside a base, or underground in caves and tunnels, and such. But in the past, when asked, Speeder and co. didn't feel any interest in making such missions.
I think it was posted somewhere here that there will be and apparently it will be unlike anything that was seen before. I wonder what that means.
Also, I wonder if it will be still a linear, Foehn only act, or we'll play the Epsilon too? Maybe every mission will be a "double mission", where at the start, we can choose which side we take on and lead to victory, so based on player choice, Act 3 could be all Foehn missions, or all Epsilon, or even "play" a story where the power shifts with every battle, one Foehn mission, then one Epsilon mission, etc, all based on player choice. I don't think I ever seen something like that in an RTS before (then again, I haven't played all of them).
Personally I can imagine an interesting gimmicky singleplayer mission, maybe related to that Tower Defense mission I suggested many months ago, where the player would have a line of these new buildings around the map and they'd have to defend against the enemy by tactically chronolifting turrets and prismtowers around the map.
That's actually completely normal for any game that got both a strong SP and a strong MP. And I'm sure that MO focuses on both.
But, it is true that I noticed that C&C games often seem to have more SP fans. With Starcraft, I always heard about the e-sports and the multiplayer and all that, all the time. While when it comes to C&C, what can be heard is people always talking about the FMV cutscenes and such, rarely about multiplayer.
SP and MP games most of the time work by radically different rulesets to begin with. When campaigns in RTS games were nothing more than just skirmish games with restricted tech (and highly boring), that argument still worked. But when it tries to be more, tell an actual story, have special events that make the player feel different emotions as part of an experience, all that needs changes that line up with that experience. MO, with its complex and highly enjoyable missions is already way too far from the old "skirmish campaign" design. It's already a "separate game", and I love the mod for it. Imo, it's the best RTS campaign since Starcraft 2. So yes, I agree, separate rulesets would make the SP and MP even more different games, than what they already are, and as far as I'm concerned, that's a positive. If it would make the campaign even more enjoyable, more experimental, more unique, and decouple all the MP changes screwing with its playability, then I'm all for it.
It's probably too late now considering the game is huge now, but probably the best way to keep SP and MP separate would be to make a copy of every unit and building with a specific tag (like MP) so changing the MP stats wouldn't affect the missions. But this would be probably insane amounts of work.