Rumor: Command & Conquer FPS inbound, dubbed 'Tiberium'

by Christopher Grant { Dec 12th 2007 at 2:00AM }

Aptly titled games blog, VideoGameBlogger.com, claims to have gotten a peek at Game Informer's January '08 issue. Featured on the cover of said issue – evidenced by the totally crappy pic over to the right – is a new FPS in the Command & Conquer universe titled Tiberium. Lending credence to the rumor is Game Informer's recent addiction to debuting games on their cover: Borderlands in September, Dead Space in October, Brutal Legend in November, and Ghostbusters in December.

VideoGamesBlogger.com has some additional details of the game, most notably that it's an FPS as opposed to the series' usual RTS format (though not the first C&C FPS, remember Renegade?); it's set 11 years after the end of the third Tiberium war (C&C fanfic writers, get to work); and is a squad-based shooter "described as Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter meets Battlefield meets Rainbow Six Vegas." Wow, that must've been some meeting.

[Thanks, Supa]

Tags: Command-and-Conquer, EA, Game-Informer, Rumor, Tiberium

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Shignami @ Dec 12th 2007 2:04AM

Ahem.

Renegade.

That is all.

Brandon @ Dec 12th 2007 2:06AM

If they get the feel close to that of Graw I would be happy.

gonk @ Dec 12th 2007 2:06AM

battlefield has squads?

i mean in bf2 you could group people into a numbered squad, but they still jacked off and did their own thing. i dunno about the bots

DemonGSides @ Dec 12th 2007 2:20AM

GRAW and R6 have enough Squad for that part of the equation, where as Battlefield had the tanks and explosions that'll make up the other part of this delicious sandwich that is a C&C FPS.

gonk @ Dec 12th 2007 2:23AM

i hope graw 3 is more refined than the first 2, and not just set in mexico

colin @ Dec 12th 2007 2:23AM

how about an rts like c&c on a smaller scale where you build and then roll into combat with weapon-mounted vehicles or you can go fps style on enemy troops, both with equal benefits toward your campaign?

you can make my check out to "cash".

colin @ Dec 12th 2007 2:24AM

to clarify, i mean you drive the vehicles and shoot with them, not just send them.

Shignami @ Dec 12th 2007 2:26AM

Or to "battlezone"

Pandemic made that game a while ago.

gonk @ Dec 12th 2007 2:28AM

and make the resource gathering as simple as in natural selection

that's my main gripe with rts's, too much focus on getting like 6 different resources and your economy depends on all of them and it's so hard to find a balance between gathering res and building armies. i guess that's why i get tired of rts's after a couple hours, then delete the demo

potato @ Dec 12th 2007 2:33AM

gonk: C&C has always had only one resource (Tiberium in the original games, Gold in Red Alert). That's always been my attraction to it, none of this AOE lumber, food, gold, stone, arghhghhghhhghg.

Give C&C3 a try, it's fast-paced, between base-setup and crazy awesome battles is fairly short, and the game always has a way to force you to build up your army in order to capture more resources, leading you to battle naturally.

gonk @ Dec 12th 2007 2:36AM

oh, cool. i never played a c/c before because i figured they were like all the other rts's

colin @ Dec 12th 2007 2:52AM

@ shignami,

was it good? is it dated?

EshuElegbara @ Dec 12th 2007 3:35AM

@Gonk: If you want an RTS without pesky resource gathering, try Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War. Instead of gathering resources, you take strategic points on the map, of which there are a limited supply. Leads to some fast paced building and some fantastic encounters.

Shignami @ Dec 12th 2007 11:12AM

Battlezone came out in 1998, the sequel (which i personally prefer) in 1999. they were quite good and they're worth checking out, you can probably "buy" it online somewhere (coughbittorrentcough)

As for being dated... considering its pushing a decade old, it is graphically quite dated.
heres a screenshot:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3b/Bz2_62.jpg

waynski1457 @ Dec 12th 2007 2:55AM

as someone who enjoyed renegade (but still found myself ditching it for bf1942 when it came out...), i am immediately looking forward to this.

jc @ Dec 12th 2007 3:01AM

Renegade was awesome for its time. The cartoony vehicles in the multiplayer made for great fun, and the single player actually had some nice little scripted events and a good conclusion.

The C&C franchise usually puts out reasonably good stuff. I think this one wont disappoint.

Mister Kay @ Dec 12th 2007 4:11AM

Too bad I could never get to the end due to a bug on the submarine level where all the walls and ground would disappear after a point :(

Truepatriot @ Dec 12th 2007 4:07AM

booo.im still waiting for an rts/fps where i can send my troops hop into any character on screen and fight too.

tactics @ Dec 12th 2007 12:37PM

battalion wars 2?

Untamed @ Dec 12th 2007 6:09AM

Tiberium, that's creative and unique.

/sarcasm

Ted @ Dec 12th 2007 6:40AM

I'd personally rather not remember Renegade actually... Still, I'm open minded about this and it's nice to have another non-cliched FPS setting on the horizon.

t_m @ Dec 12th 2007 8:37AM

Wow, I can't believe they've come up with an idea as innovative as "tactical military fps" meets "tactical military fps" meets "tactical military fps".

That is some pretty darn amazing cross genre innovation right there!

(so effectively its renegade redux?)

Jake @ Dec 12th 2007 8:48AM

If you can jump in a Mammoth tank at some point in the game, I'm in.

kepolar @ Dec 12th 2007 1:37PM

To this day I haven't played a more enjoyable multiplayer FPS than Renegade. The strategy elements of vehicles, credits, building destruction, stealth, nukes, etc... added a whole new level of team play that I haven't seen since.
As a fan of Renegade I don't know what to think, especially with EA at the helm. They had better keep the game play similar. If they use the repetitive control points formula I'm going to cry. Since they’re calling it a team based shooter, I hope that they make it multiplayer only like TF2. Single player Renegade was garbage and detracted from the game. Hmmmm, they’re probably going to focus on consoles first, PCs second, Ugh.
My prediction is that they’re going to market it as a Halo killer.

ogvor @ Dec 12th 2007 4:37PM

I am in total agrement with your assessment of Renagades multiplayer. The dynamics of having a base and economy for all the player's created strategies and tactics I've yet to see in another game. Counter strike and others have the money aspect, BF2 and Halo had vehicles, but nothing has had bases you destroyed that were critical to your teams ability to play. The barracks gave you good soldiers, the war factory (or airstrip) gave you vehicles, the tiberium refinery gave you all money. I was really hiping for an updated version of these mechanics whenI heard about this game but it just sounds like another "tactical shooter" which really, don't we have enough of?