Summary: I'm 24 and I guess I come from the older generation of RTS gamers. To me, no game has ever even compared to StarCraft when it comes to RTS games. Red Alert was probably a distant second. That being said, this is probably one of the funner recent RTS releases. I've played through a few missions and it was overall pretty fun. This review is intended for single player, only. Personally, I love the FMVs from Red Alert and really looked forward to the live action in this one.
Summary: EA has earned a reputation for producing bland but competent games. What I got, much to my surprise, was a professional, slickly presented and enjoyable Single-player campaign, combined with a bland multiplayer component. First, the Single-Player campaign. Not as cheesy or fun as Red Alert 2 or the original C&C. This is especially evident in GDI, where the supporting characters take themselves way to seriously.
Summary: First of all, this is a fun and addicting game that stays mostly true to the first. That could be a good and bad thing. The first one captured many fans who stayed up all night playing LAN matches and cursing as their base was destroyed. How many do you think this one had, plus it has great online MP. However the Kane edition is really no diffrent then the first. Throw in a DVD that's not really worth it, three unit skins, and 2 maps that come with Kane's Wrath.
Summary: Graphic: Zoom in/out rotation left/right all look good in Mechanic/structure detail. Air forces blow out hot air effect and dust are impressive. Anti air guns look funny like water when firing though. With moderate CPU/GPU, like E6600/ati 1950pro, and 1680x1050 with max setting, it maintains almost no noticable frame rates below my eyes can sense in any cases so far. So I wonder why some other games require so much more cpu/gpu powers with or w/o better graphics.
Summary: C&C3 is all about building a large force fast and crushing the other side, also known as "Zerging". There is almost no time when you will have to build up a base that can withstand a large scale attack. I like turtling and slowly climbing up the tech tree and making an army of powerful units but in C&C3 you almost always must just build the basic structures and units then run like mad to overwhelm the other side.
Shiny new paint on an old-school game (still fun, though)
Andrew C., Amazon
26 October 2007
Summary: I am new to the Command and Conquer series, so I bought C&C3 with no particular expectations. I thought that the demo--which I recommend you play before buying--was merely decent, but decided to give the game a shot. If you are into real-time strategy (RTS) games, this one is worth a try. It is fairly easy to pick up and play, has lengthy campaigns, and it looks great. However, this is, at best, second-tier gaming in my book.
Summary: Although they went with the "if ain't broken" method (just like the road Starcraft 2 appears to be taking), it still packs a punch. One of the best RTS in years. And for those with a beefy system, get Company of Heroes too!
Summary: I thought the graphics were decent with respect to the units, and excellent for the terrain and explosions. That said, I really would have liked to see this game developed on the DirectX 10 platform. I thought the game engine was very smooth (not choppy when you have a lot of units battling) and I didn't encounter any bugs or in-game crashes, so kudos to EA and the developers for not rushing an unfinished product out the door before it was ready.