30 years and two days ago, a game went on sale that will never leave my mind, and I know I'll be playing it at least once a year until I retire. Just like HoMM 3, Doom, Settlers 3, and the like. Check out my review of the Collector's Edition.
Playing this game, two conclusions came to mind. If we didn't experience a title during its prime time (or a few years after its release), we don't feel nostalgic for it. Furthermore, if we don't have to experience it of our own free will, we'll likely have a different opinion than fans who grew up with it. And with today's frequency of new product releases, that window of time is even narrower. To make sure you understand me, let me compare it to Dragon Ball. When this anime aired on Polish television, internet access was limited, while other channels offered few alternatives, and the entry threshold was exceptionally low due to its simple plot. It's no surprise, then, that it became a cult title for quite a few people of my generation, practically all over the world. While a large group, it's not everyone. I know people who deliberately ignored this anime or didn't like it, and I also know others who missed out on the hype. For various reasons: lack of time, inability to watch all the episodes (some didn't want to wait for episodes every day), etc. Both those who watch anime today and those who aren't interested. All of these people will be more impressed by the simplified plot, simple animation, and generally underdeveloped characters. DBZ undoubtedly has its share of merits, and it stands out from other titles in several respects, but it has aged poorly and has too little to offer today. The same is true for the games I've discussed.
The second conclusion is that remasters, even those that significantly improve graphics and add features that couldn't be implemented on release day or several years after, aren't always good for all players. They usually benefit mostly fans. The older a game, the more significant its flaws, the more features it typically has that weren't considered at the time of its development. This applies not only to games but also to films and anime, for example, which are boring, overly drawn out, or lacking in content. These shortcomings are evident in easy missions, game length, and limited content to discover. To be clear, many older games are more difficult, but this was sometimes due to artificially extending gameplay time or the desire to maximize profits, for example, if the title was released on arcades. In the case of PC titles, many of these titles could be completed according to a specific pattern typical of the genre. Back then, this wasn't so noticeable, not only due to age but also experience. If we were older, had better reflexes, thought, and acted more efficiently, we would have finished many titles in one, two, maybe three longer sessions at the computer. Consistently completing missions would have been enough, but that doesn't mean we had to rush through it. This year's remaster of Command and Conquer is precisely such a game. This is a title intended mainly for fans and is unlikely to delight other players.
I started out unenthusiastic, which isn't appropriate for such a fan of these games. That's not to say I didn't like the game; quite the contrary, I'm having a blast; I got the game I'd been waiting for over 20 years. It's just that Tiberian Dawn and the 2020 version of Red Alert made me painfully aware of what I wrote in the introduction. In my articles about WarCraft 1&2, CnC 1995, and RA, I mentioned several times that Westwood games were better than Blizzard products in terms of story, narrative, and characters. But that was over 20 years ago, and a lot has changed in that time. Sure, if you ignore everything that happened since, the classic Command and Conqer games are still better in terms of storytelling, but that would be cherry-picking and trying to shape the narrative to suit your perspective. The third installment of WarCraft came out, developing all the ideas brilliantly. Blizzard's employees, in turn, have learned to better tell stories and utilize the possibilities of such lore. Westwood did not waste time in this regard, but in my opinion, it was less effective. No subsequent installment in the CnC series, whether in the form of Tiberium Wars or RA, has been able to match the artistry of the creators of SC and WC. Just as I was captivated by the story of Tiberian Dawn in the '90s and only liked Red Alert, this year's playthrough of the campaign made me feel like I was playing WarCraft 2, a game that's archaic and outdated.
Perhaps it's purely subjective, but the TD script has aged somewhat better. In my opinion, this stems from the studio taking the script more seriously, and we got a real conflict that was engaging and didn't contain so many ridiculous scenes. I don't know if it was intentional or not, but Stalin being portrayed as a buffoon, or General Nikos Stavros as an incompetent coward, threw me off-kilter. In the older game, we had Joe Kucan, aka Kane, who was an incomparably better-developed and thought-out character than anyone we've seen in Westwood's newer title. In TD, there were additional storylines that, while they went nowhere or weren't developed enough (looking at them from the perspective of the series as a whole), at least enriched the world of NOD and GDI at the time. We had plots about fake news, propaganda from both sides, the toxic effects of Tiberium on nature and humanity, and the testing of secret weapons, all of which were missing in this alternate version of World War II. The game about the Allies and the Soviets had room to introduce such elements, but we got nothing, or almost nothing. The only plotline that stood out to me was the espionage elements, tracking super-technology, so-called "dark projects" (new weapons hidden from other countries and the public). Apart from that, maybe I missed something, as I've been a bit biased towards the RA storyline since childhood, but Westwood's newer game is certainly less so in this regard. This is all the more painful because even in what I consider a better game, I see many gaps that could have been filled in a remastered version. Since they were practically remaking the game anyway, they could have added a few more story-developing missions. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this was the case in the remastered version of StarCraft 1. I haven't played it myself, but I've heard from two sources I trust that several missions have been added that improve the single-player campaign.
The plot of Tiberian Dawn, like RA, presents an alternative version of our world. A meteorite containing a resource unknown to humanity falls to Earth. Tiberium, as it is named after the place where the extraterrestrial stone fell (the Tiber River), becomes the most important resource on our planet. It influences stock markets, disrupts the balance of power in the world, and is generally used for many different purposes, primarily for profit. Two factions are fighting for it – GDI, which is NATO's equivalent, and the NOD brotherhood, a kind of ISIS state, but with much greater influence, a more developed structure, and a financial and intellectual base. When we chose GDI, we fought in Europe, while NOD retook Africa from the good guys. As for Red Alert, as I mentioned, that title also tells an alternative story. This time, Albert Einstein created an invention known as the Chronosphere, thanks to which the world's most famous Adolf entered a different era. However, nature abhors a vacuum, and if something is going to happen, it will happen one way or another. Stalin, being the most powerful leader in Europe, occupies almost the entire continent. This time, regardless of the side chosen, we have a single theater of operations – Europe. If we choose the Allies, we retake it from the Soviets and end up in Moscow, and if we choose the Soviets, we establish a communist regime across the entire continent.
Regarding the graphics, I'll say the same as with anime – I'm not an expert in this area, so don't rely on my opinions. As for the facts, the 2020 version offers both the old graphics and the updated 4K version. The interface has also been tidied up, reducing the need to scroll (I'm referring to the sidebar where you recruit soldiers or build new buildings or vehicles), and the quality of the cutscenes has been improved. The live-action versions still look poor and show signs of wear and tear, especially those from Red Alert, but the ones without human actors look quite good. Of course, they're nowhere near the Blizzard level, even from the original StarCraft, but they're from such an old game that they would have to be reshot. Overall, Command and Conquer 2020 is an incomparably better remaster than the infamous WarCraft 3: Reforged. Especially since Petroglyph and Lemon Sky Studios had a much more difficult task to complete. Reforged "only" needed a refresh and some tweaks. Tiberian Dawn and the first RA, on the other hand, are old-school games, not much younger than the first Doom or WarCraft: Orcs and Humans, so tweaks were out of the question. All structures, units, and map elements had to be drawn from scratch because there would have been too much empty space. These would have been especially noticeable when zooming in on the map. I don't currently have a very powerful laptop, and I haven't adjusted the graphics settings. I've been playing on default settings and it works fine. I do experience slowdowns and slight lag, but only when I launch a game or suddenly overload the computer. I've been playing with several programs running in the background and listening to podcasts on YouTube. So far, I haven't had any such issues with large battles, and the FPS never dropped below 60 (except in the situations I mentioned above). The graphics probably won't impress you, but they're nice and clear, and the game doesn't overly tax your computer.
EA has added missions from the console versions of the game to the remastered version, new tools for modders, an add-on gallery, and new tracks recorded by Frank Klepacki and the Tiberian Sons. I'm especially happy with the new maps I longed to play 15 years ago, and the music. Starting with the maps, I'll definitely play through them eventually, maybe even over the Christmas break. I played a few of them a few months ago, and they didn't seem difficult or complex, which isn't surprising, since they were ultimately released on consoles. I don't know what the controls were like on the Sega Saturn or Nintendo 64; I only know RA for the PlayStation, which was surprisingly smooth and easy to play. I assume the controls weren't as simple in the case of Tiberian Dawn – Westwood lacked experience, and even if another studio was responsible for console ports, RTS games on those platforms were even more exotic than they are today. Returning to the mods and improved map editor – it's great, and I'd definitely be happy about it, but that was 15 years ago at the latest. Maybe 10 years ago, I'd be interested, but probably not for long. It doesn't offer me anything. Unless some CnC fanboy makes a remastered version of Tiberian Sun before the EA-Petroglyph-LemonSky trio does, in which case I'd gladly use it. It would be a different story if it were an editor for WarCraft 3 – I'd gladly play remastered maps like DotA and other AOS games. Of course, it would be different from the one added to Reforged, because Blizzard screwed over it, as well as the entire remaster.
The soundtrack for both games is one of the best I've ever heard. I've loved listening to it for over 20 years and have a huge fondness for it. Before the game's release, I was worried whether it would be closer to the original or the revised version later released by Westwood. Fortunately for me, the musician created something closer to the original soundtrack, and there are practically none of the new elements that have been bothering me for years. Not only did Frank Klepacki re-record all the previous tracks, but we also got a few new songs performed by him and the Tiberian Sons. Tiberian Sons reminds me of Level 70 Elite Tauren Chieftain, a band composed of Blizzard employees who recorded several songs for WC3 and WoW, such as "Rogues Do It From Behind" and "Power of the Horde." Both groups record music that straddles hard rock and metal, but there's one difference: the band associated with CnC utilizes elements of electronic music. The game's soundtrack is similar; we have slightly stronger, guitar-driven tracks, as well as those recorded with electronic instruments. Many tracks combine both genres, but there are also sharp, battle-themed pieces and calmer ambient pieces. My relationship with this soundtrack is extremely personal (it's the first RTS I started loving), so it's hard to judge whether it's objectively good, but I can certainly rank it among the better ones. I've never had such a great time playing CnC; this game is a model for how to remaster a soundtrack. Fans will find what they loved in the first game, but stronger and better. "Act on Instict," my favorite track from the original, isn't as good as the original, but the new version is so good that I don't care. The rest of the soundtrack is pure gold, a dream come true for me as a fan. Both tracks, "Hell March," sound incredibly epic, as does "Gridender." Command and Conquer is my new favorite track in this universe, while "Slave to the System," "No Mercy," and "I Got a Present for You" are just as epic. And the Collector's Edition also included a USB drive that looked like a Tiberium crystal. A Christmas dream come true.
As for the multiplayer, I can't say much about it. When the game was in its prime time, I didn't have the option to play online. I did have internet access, but since it was a standard modem, it probably wouldn't have happened without a lot of lag. Currently, I prefer to avoid this mode of entertainment because I don't have the time or the inclination. I mean, I might find the time, but as for the inclination... I've dedicated tens of thousands of hours to matches in Wc3, DotA, LoL, and much less in AoE2 or StarCraft, and I'm sated for the rest of my life when it comes to matches with other players.
However, I can wonder if CnC 2020 will achieve success in this field. Currently, RTS games aren't as popular as they were a dozen or so years ago. Sure, they're not dead, as some say, but they're far from their peak popularity. One or two RTS games a year are perfectly sufficient for players. This is thanks to MOBA games, a genre that was born thanks to WarCraft 3. Before anyone complains, yes, the seeds of it were already there in the previous installment and StarCraft 1, but they're so archaic compared to WarCraft 3 that I won't mention them. Players no longer enjoy watching long streams; instead, they prefer 20- to 40-minute matches. This is why LoL and DotA are more dynamic than they were 10 years ago. Online RTS matches don't last much longer, but there are too many things to control, which isn't as appealing to most modern players. Instead, they prefer to watch 5v5 matches, as 10 heroes battle it out for the Nexus. EA has stated that it wants to develop multiplayer and introduce the game to esports. They tried this with RA3 and CnC3, but it didn't quite work out because too few players wanted to play them. The games I'm reviewing might be different, though – they're not overly complex, which doesn't mean they're trivial. At the same time, they're dynamic enough, with small maps that allow for quick combat. Therefore, the game has a good chance of meeting the expectations of modern gamers. Will it do so? I don't know; it's been a long time since its release, and I haven't heard of any online tournaments yet. However, that might be because I'm not particularly interested in them.
In short, I'm not sure if the game will appeal to people who have never played classic RTS games. It might not be the best comparison, but it's the first one that came to mind – CnC2020 is an analog clock that was good in the '90s, but with the advancement of technology and electronic gadgets, it's becoming increasingly redundant. That doesn't mean it's useless; it's just that many later games, even those with smaller budgets or from lesser developers, do their job better. You might like an analog clock because you appreciate its old-school design, and you might even install it in your living room or bedroom, but a good electronic clock performs better in every respect. It's easier to set, you can adjust the volume, change the alarm, and you can move it around more easily. And what if the aesthetics aren't as good? Well, for most people, functionality matters. Command and Conquer will definitely find its niche, but I don't know how active that niche will be in promoting and developing the game. It's hard to say what it will be like. The fan base for RA and CnC isn't as large as for WarCraft and StarCraft, and it also seems less active. As for the game itself, it's a good trip down memory lane and a big dose of nostalgia for fans, but if you're not a fan of Westwood games, I'd recommend the AoE or WarCraft 3 remasters. Unfortunately, the latter is only available on torrents, as Blizzard has blocked its sale, and you can only buy the garbage Reforged.
30 lat i 2 dn