Generals was horrible, C&C3 was 5x better, RA3 was 2x better than that. (And that's saying something because I normally don't like the RA universe)
Out of all the games EA makes, C&C has to be the one where they are the most involved with the fans. EA is the only company, other than Westwood, that can handle this series correctly because they already have 3 games in the run and each has been better than the last. Giving it to another company means everything will probably be destroyed from the ground up. (C&C4 would have the ever original unit: The Space Marine!)
Anyway, since Westwood isn't around anymore, I'm glad it's EA who has the series and not anyone else.
As for the expansion, it looks pretty nice. One thing I don't like though is that Giga fortress thing that Japan has... it looks both really stupid and uninventive. (OOO a giant floating head that shoots lasers! )
QUOTE (=HT=Duro @ Jan 20 2009, 12:37 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This isn't entirely true. Or did you forget about what happened to Tiberium? It got delayed, then later canceled. As for the patches you are talking about, they are patches that require the actual people playing for them to input. Like the automatch system and the balance changes. Those patches require the input of the community in order to be made, or else more people would end up being displeased with the game.
Seriously, think about it. Would you want them to release a balance patch based off of what they alone think? Or do you want them to take your input and incorporate the feedback into the patch? Obviously, you would want them to hear your feedback. And as such, they can't just incorporate what you feel without you actually telling them what you feel. Make sense?