Westwood version Of Generals had planned more factions, Pictures from early design and my point of view. Options

[GamerOpsSteel]

http://www.cnc-source.com/forums/index.php...si&img=3556

The African hero unit looked kool, to bad ea games cut out all the great stuff.


http://www.cnc-source.com/forums/index.php...si&img=6275

The European faction Headquarters looked good


http://www.cnc-source.com/forums/index.php...si&img=6265

Can some ex Dev of generals maybe shed some light on this building?


http://www.cnc-source.com/forums/index.php...si&img=6278
The Khan Mercenary looks like a kick ass, nice job on whoever did the art work (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
to bad it was cut by ea games.
version

Now my point of view.

I think ea games should have not rushed Westwood studio back in 2001 or 2002 when westwood still had planned the early versions of C&C Generals, ea games should have not intervened over the game design part.

And whats more to my talking memo point is that, Westwood was moving forward into the future
for example most of the early Concepts showed us that westwood wanted generals to be a Modern
futuristic type warfare, as for the factions i think this how generals could have been as a finished product

Early
C&C Generals Westwood Studio Planned Sides Idea

Planned Factions By WW
1.Europeans
2.Americans
3.Khans [Turkish/Mongolian]
4.Arabs [Maybe in the future expansion pack? if westwood had its way (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) ]
5.Russians
6.Africans

But when ea games intervened this how we got generals
Final Planned sides by ea games
1.USA
2.GLA
3.CHINA

Anyway, for ea game's sake and if ea wants to still have the support of the Command & Conquer fans, i think its never to late to learn there own mistakes from the past.

do you agree or disagree?

[Cypher]

ROFL!

Dude, it was EA who made Generals, not Westwood.

And those various concept pieces were just ideas to for armies to go into the game. Ideas dropped by the developers, not cause of any pressure from anyone.
Those sides were never actually planned - just ideas for sides.

Don't spread new rumors.

[GamerOpsSteel]

ROFL!

Dude, it was EA who made Generals, not Westwood.

And those various concept pieces were just ideas to for armies to go into the game. Ideas dropped by the developers, not cause of any pressure from anyone.
Those sides were never actually planned - just ideas for sides.

Don't spread new rumors.

Ok so maybe i misheard some fans, but i thought Westwood made generals, since the art design comes from them i think (IMG:style_emoticons/default/mellow.gif)

[Cypher]

Not at all Westwood's style.
These were EA Pacific, at the time.
The only "Westwood" game they made was RA2.

[vb4]

What's so bad about it?
Units, factions and features get cut while developing a game. Everything else would be insane. (And I know an RTS series which DID keep every single feature... And added as many as possible)

Generals still turned out as a rather good competitive RTS, even though the lack of support more or less killed it. And the campaign was s@!$. And the German censors, but that's tradition for C&C.

[GamerOpsSteel]

What's so bad about it?

Cons
-The Worst possible Single player campaign ever made in a video game for an rts, for exmaple
remember that bull crap mission in iraq? what was that about? Showing Americas Strength on war on terror (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) please give me a break.

-Seemed like a Pro bush ideology game type, as in fighting the bad guys, who live in caves and make sneak attack tunnel's? i mean come on ea games you can do better then that.

-Unit design in the final game were crap, didnt look anything like in the magazine preview that i saw back in 2002, Hell the screen shots in the magazine were alot better then the final game.

What they could have done is.

-Stayed with these factions
1.Europeans-Generals
2.Americans-Generals
3.Khans [Turkish/Mongolian] Generals

and leave out the 3 remaining factions for the expansion pack
4.Arabs
5.Russians
6.Africans

leave out some other factions for the expansion pack, what i mean is if they stayed with those sides and with old concept arts for those different factions with a much clearly storyline for generals i think generals could have been a much better game then.

This post has been edited by GamerOpsSteel: Apr 29 2008, 01:01 PM

[Cr4zyJ0ker]

Petro should make a game like Generals but better and no crazy game like UaW beause you can see nobody want such a game or not many. It is hard to identify with one of the fraktions in UaW and in Generals it is easy especially for the people who lives in the USA. (patriotism)

[vb4]

Petro should make a game like Generals but better and no crazy game like UaW beause you can see nobody want such a game or not many. It is hard to identify with one of the fraktions in UaW and in Generals it is easy especially for the people who lives in the USA. (patriotism)

UaW had a quite similar and in many ways improved gameplay. It felt like based on Generals.

About the identity thing... I can't relate to robots without personality. This is what they are in Germany.
I don't how anything about the uncensored version. And I didn't know the campaign had a story.
What next? FMV sequences?

This post has been edited by vb4: Apr 29 2008, 03:07 PM

[ChessRules]

Petro should make a game like Generals but better and no crazy game like UaW beause you can see nobody want such a game or not many. It is hard to identify with one of the fraktions in UaW and in Generals it is easy especially for the people who lives in the USA. (patriotism)

I wouldn't really say that about Generals, personally, because the factions really didn't have any personality, and the "campaign" consisted of a bunch of random missions strung together into an incoherent mess (although I won't deny that a couple of them were fun... well, China 7, GLA 2 and USA 4 anyways).

I'd rather see a conflict slightly further in the future, such as "what happens after this whole Mideast war thing is over anyways?"

EDIT: Every time someone bashes EA for no real reason except to bash EA, the Stone-Like kills a kitten. Please, think of the kittens.

This post has been edited by ChessRules: Apr 29 2008, 03:40 PM

[Gray__Fox]

Don't spread new rumors.

Geeze Cypher... again with the seeds of deciet... even Ishmael had said Westwood did 90% of the work on Generals and most of them worked on it before leaving EALA toward the end/after the release. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/mellow.gif)

EDIT: Every time someone bashes EA for no real reason except to bash EA, the Stone-Like kills a kitten. Please, think of the kittens.

I'm allergic to cats... sooooo...
Onward the more the merrier.

Petro should make a game like Generals but better and no crazy game like UaW beause you can see nobody want such a game or not many. It is hard to identify with one of the fraktions in UaW and in Generals it is easy especially for the people who lives in the USA. (patriotism)

Isn't it sad that now-a-days people can totally hate ona game with creativity and only have an interest in things that are too close to reality... they want realism so much they can't see greatness in something unfamiliar... I guess gamers have lost their senses over the years of what it is that makes things kool.

[Stratigest]

Those concepts look interesting, I wonder why they where cut?

I recall someone stating a unit called the Scorpion (not the GLA poor excuse of a tank that is undeserving of it's name) was also planed but cut.

I'm allergic to cats... sooooo...
Onward the more the merrier.

*agrees* (I'm also highly allergic to cats)

This post has been edited by The Stratigest: Apr 30 2008, 12:17 AM

[Anung1989]

Looks like SDI Uplink is some sort of anti-nuke/superweapon structure. SDI was the name of the US program to develop ABM tech of the sci-fi variety during the Cold War to counter USSR's ballistic arsenal.

[Cypher]

Gray_Fox...
They worked on Zero Hour and Zero Hour ONLY.

[GamerOpsSteel]

Gray_Fox...
They worked on Zero Hour and Zero Hour ONLY.

Chpher dont you know that Before EALA came to be what it is now, they had to close down westwood studio, Why? well you know why.


I have to agree with Gray_Fox on this on.

EA back in 2001 didnt have a prowerfully rts team, like it has right now.
They had to work with westwood, you think ea would make a great game by them selfs?

btw Louis Castle is still with ea games. '
Maybe he could still save command & conquer games, before its to late.

This post has been edited by GamerOpsSteel: Apr 30 2008, 01:56 AM

[Cypher]

ROFL

Dude, quick history lesson for you.

There once was Westwood Studios.
They made many games, among them Dune 2, C&C, Covert Ops, RA and TS with Firestorm.
Then Westwood Studios had a sister studio under their family with Virgin - that studio was Virgin Interactive Pacific, managed by Mark Skaggs.
(A whole different studio, called Intelligent Games London made Dune 2000 and Emperor: Battle for Dune for Westwood)
VIP did the PS version of RA - RA: Retaliation.
Then, with EA purchasing Westwood and VIP from Virgin, VIP became Westwood Pacific and under that banner they made Nox and RA2/YR, while Westwood was doing Renegade, Pirates: Legend of Black Kat and E&B Online.
RA2 success made EA give Westwood Pacific autonomy - and they became EA Pacific and got 12M$ to make another RTS and get into a whole new facility in Irvine, California. They made Generals.
That's about when the whole EA_Spouse fiasco came about.

Then EA decided to consolidate West Coast operations and they closed and moved the EA Pacific and Westwood Studios teams to LA, and joined them with what was DreamWorks Interactive.
That became the EALA we know now.
That's when Zero Hour was made - by the guys that did Generals and with help from Westwood designers. That's why ZH was so much better than Gen, IMO.

IMHO, EALA are doing a good job taking C&C to a whole new level.

[SCC-PG]

Cypher pretty much has it. I'll add a few details I know about...

Westwood proper (Vegas) was tapped to some extent for resources on RA2 and Yuri's, and I know that resources from Westwood were used not insignificantly for C&C: Generals, for example some engineers and concept artists, and probably others. All were decidedly EAP products, however. As with most games, Generals had much grander plans than were realized in the shipped product. I don't recall any specifics about that concept art referenced though.

After Westwood closed, a few of us caught the tail end of Generals development and added what we could to the project before it wrapped up. I added Blizzard style right click attack/move to it and made it work with the the right click drag scrolling, for example. Then we went to town on Zero Hour.

The EA_Spouse fiasco came about during the Lord of the Rings BFME project, at least a year after Westwood was closed. I'm pretty sure the guy whose spouse wrote it wasn't hired until a year or so in on development (though, the complaints would generally apply to conditions back to years earlier). If so, it's kind of ironic that the whistle blower was someone who endured it the least. Regardless, it's good that someone put their neck out finally.

I agree, they're doing a great job with C&C overall. I can understand those who are frustrated with where they've taken the fiction, however.

[Cypher]

Steve, I thought that the ea_spouse'... husband worked on the SAGE from the get go.
Maybe it was even Natty?

[GamerOpsSteel]

So the ea_spouse wrote and made Generals?
now that you put that way, can someone maybe shed some light on why were those other factions

Been cut out from the final version?

I understand that 9/11 happened, but thats no reason to scrap generals and turn into a pro bush type game :/


I liked the Original factions, idea and unit design
and i hope perto will make a similar game, like the early version of generals

I also think it would be a great game.

And i hope that ea games can fix there own past mistakes since after all they do still have
Louis Castle with them.

This post has been edited by GamerOpsSteel: Apr 30 2008, 03:38 AM

[hagren]

The EA_Spouse fiasco came about during the Lord of the Rings BFME project, at least a year after Westwood was closed. I'm pretty sure the guy whose spouse wrote it wasn't hired until a year or so in on development (though, the complaints would generally apply to conditions back to years earlier). If so, it's kind of ironic that the whistle blower was someone who endured it the least. Regardless, it's good that someone put their neck out finally.

And do you think the situation is better now at EALA? For the devs, I mean.

This post has been edited by hagren: Apr 30 2008, 04:38 AM

[Cypher]

I know it is.
Miles better.
Not just EALA, EA as a whole.