After it was revealed that the upcoming free-to-play Command & Conquer was to be a multiplayer-only affair, EA have confirmed that the game will feature a single-player campaign.
“Our intention with Command & Conquer is to create a triple-A experience. And by that I mean we’re using Frostbite tech, we’re using very high-end graphics,” said EA’s Frank Gibeau. “Does that mean it’s not going to have single-player? No, that’s something we’ve obviously heard loud and clear that is important to people.”
“The beauty of free-to-play, is that we can adjust and adapt to what we’re hearing as opposed to, ‘I’m sorry, it’s two months from ship and it is what it is.’”
The game was formally known as Command & Conquer: Generals 2, but due to a switch to a free-to-play model, the game is now known simply as Command & Conquer.
Command & Conquer is being developed exclusively by Bioware Victory for PC, and is expected to be released sometime in 2013.
Sign up for the closed beta at the official Command & Conquer site.
Source: Polygon
Related articles
Command & Conquer Ultimate Collection announced
Command & Conquer Generals 2 going free-to-play
Loading ...
The best single player games emerge from a concept that one or more authors had. They had a story that they needed to tell, and then found that using a video game to tell it would be the best (probably because of their own expertise & skills)
This is not going to work, and I’m willing to put money on that.
The premise of the game is to create a multiplayer RTS within the C&C universe. Now they’re going to work some kind of single player experience into it as an afterthought. It’s going to feel forced and out of place. Done simply for the sake of having a SP campaign.
Look no further than BF3. That was designed with multiplayer in mind, and the “mandatory” SP campaign was a total waste of creative talent. I predict the same for C&C.