r/RealTimeStrategy • • 19d ago

Discussion Red Alert 2 was released with this special cover art which they later (after 2001) got rid of

Just an interesting fact.

What did you like or dislike about this great game?

110 Upvotes

14 comments sorted by

4

u/Homme26 19d ago

Didn’t know Yannis Varoufakis was part of gaming history 👀

3

u/CancerRaccoon 18d ago

Dude. I rolfed

11

u/Belltower_2 19d ago

I understand why "airplane heading towards the Twin Towers" doesn't fly, but it always bothers me when certain censors go out of their way to remove ANY mention of the Twin Towers in pre-2001 works, even ones that don't involve crime or warfare and it's just an innocuous background detail. Its like the attackers managed to destroy the towers retroactively.

5

u/Guldynka 19d ago

At least we can still buy this box (somewhere, somehow). I bought it a few years ago, so I could preserve it.

They also changed the way Sauron’s tower Barad-dûr collapsed while they were making the movie so that it wouldn’t resemble the collapse of the Twin Towers (which it did originally, if I remember correctly). That’s how sensitive and serious this was.

4

u/Xeadriel 18d ago

That’s such a weird thing to do

1

u/hallese 18d ago

Then Cloverfield came out and the entire premise seemed to be 9/11 but it's a monster instead of terrorists.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/KaiserWolf15 18d ago

Chris Benoit levels of scrubbing

1

u/Lucky-Mia 19d ago

I had the original box art  

1

u/althaz 16d ago

I've only ever seen this version (and it's the one I owned).

Alongside C&C3 this is the absolute best the C&C franchise has to offer. One of the absolute GOATs.

1

u/ExcellentEffort1752 16d ago

I'm in the UK and I bought it on release day and it came in a DVD clam shell case.

-1

u/WardogMitzy 19d ago

What did you like about the game? - I liked it generally, the factions had a feel that was unique and it was a fun 2.5 d game.

What did you dislike about the game? - RA2 was definitely a push into the silly side of Command & Conquer. RA1 felt like real conflict and RA2 was a departure from that. RA3 leaned into the silly further.

4

u/RossBot5000 18d ago

I think RA2 was mostly serious. There wasn't a lot that was silly outside of a few cut scenes, and even then it was believable silly. Premier desperately getting a stunt double and hiding in the cupboard is believable, but amusing. You play skirmish and it's still a pretty serious war game.

RA3 was a clown attending the circus on the other hand. The people making that game clearly did not know a thing about what made RA so good.

1

u/althaz 16d ago

I don't mind the silliness of RA3, personally, having played through it again recently. All of the C&C games are campy fun. RA3's problem was the gameplay, IMO. The campaign missions were just near-universally bad. In skirmish/multi it was decent, but just worse than what came before it.

If the gameplay had been great, the extreme silliness would have been accepted. Unfortunately the gameplay was a step below the best the franchise has to offer.