![]() Their reward would be our money, it seems pretty fair to me. Of course it can requires a lot to remaster a game but it's not like we would get it for free. I rather have a good remaster than a half assed one.Īs long as they dont screw this up and consumers like and buy it, RA2 can be a possibillity. Set in the early 1970s, Red Alert 2 picks up at the conclusion of the Allied campaign of the first game. It's not something you can remaster nilly willy. Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2 is a real-time strategy game. Some people need to realise that back in the day, you only wrote code that worked specificly with certain systems. Because once again it was build from the ground up when they developed it back then. RA2 requires its own approach since is completely different from the first two games. You get a ton of game for that price and bonus features and never seen before behind the scenes footage. And it's 2 games and 3 expansion packs + all playstation exclusive levels + remastered cutscenes, remastered (even completely newly composed pieces of the soundtrack that were lost) + map editor, plus multiplayer support, plus a bunch of master levels (fanmade levels) if I'm not mistaken. Originally posted by 3RDplayer:It makes sense to remaster those games first, because they share the same engine.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |