Rating: 
Summary: very disappointing
Review: I am a C&C fan but was very disappointed by the latest release, C&C Generals.
A lot of problems are still there, you would imagine them being fixed by now. The AI is still just stupid & predictable, units dont respond when fired at, pathfinding sucks. There is no storyline. Missions are repetitive, too easy, too few in number and all of them boil down to 'blow up the enemy base'. The AI still cheats, it keeps building faster than you even without any income, it knows exactly where any of your buildings is located without ever entering your base or using a spydrone. Multiplayer is still plagued by the tankrush. It is too bad the navy has been eliminated.even though the graphics are superb and it is a lot of fun to nuke the enemy base it takes more than that to make a great game.
Needles to say the game is not playable on the recommended system, you need something far more powerful. Buy it used, it is not worth the full price.
Rating: 
Summary: Holy **** this is fun!!!
Review: This is the best Command&Conquer Yet! Just buy it trust me, before its gone! This has the best graphics ,sounds, and realistic pictures. It's a sin not to buy this game
Rating: 
Summary: A polished (and final) entry in the C&C series
Review: This latest entry in the Command and Conquer series will, unfortunately, probably be the very last as Westwood was just recently amalgamated into Electronic Arts. In accordance with this amalgamation, the plotline for this game is radically different from its predecessors. The Brotherhood of Nod have been replaced with the GLA, while the US and Chinese armies have taken the place of the GDI. The storyline for Generals is an uncomfortable reflection of real life events, with GLA terrorists invading middle eastern nations like Baghdad and Afghanistan. Naturally, the Chinese and the US are out to stop them. The parallels are a little too close to reality, and this does remove some of the fun and campiness from the game that were often present in its predecessors. Red Alert 2 was a delightful example of this. This is also the first C&C game that contains more than 2 sides, which makes for some rather entertaining skirmish and campaign missions. The US uses a combination of air power and ground forces to crush their opponents, with very little emphasis on "weapons of mass destruction". Instead, the player would be wise to use precision airstrikes and artillery to crush their opponents. The GLA have units very similar to NOD, in that they are fast, light and mobile. This makes them very useful for ambushes, but they become expendable in prolonged skirmishes. Their greatest strength lies in the effective use of suicide bombers and toxic bio-weapons. The GLA is a good side for those who use stealth to defeat their opponents. The Chinese use overwhelming numbers and firepower to defeat their enemies. Fans of the old "tank rush" strategy will love playing as the Chinese, especially as Chinese tanks get attack bonuses if they are grouped in large enough numbers. The graphics in Generals are easily the most impressive of any entry in the C&C series. The game makes excellent use of 3D-accelerated graphics to render huge maps consisting of mountains and flowing rivers. Tanks will raise clouds of dust as they move across desert terrain. Jet fighters will execute tight banking turns as they engage a target. Most impressive are the super-weapons, like the Chinese Nuclear missile, or the GLA Scud Missiles. The most glaring downsides to this game are the portrayal of the GLA as your stereotypical Arab terrorist. This may be particularly offensive to members of the Arab community, with
its (hopefully) unintended racial stereotyping. The apocalyptic end cutscene of the GLA campaign will certainly not help matters. In addition, some users have reported compatiblity problems while running Generals on their PC's. Please check the internet to ensure that your PC is compatible with the game. Also, be warned that this game does require an extremely fast PC. I have an Athlon 2000+ XP with 512MB RAM and a 64MB GEForce4 videocard, and I can run the game in 1024x768 on high detail. Anything less than this, and you may have problems. Other than this, Generals is an excellent game. Yes, other than the updated graphics it doesn't present any revolutionary innovations to the RTS genre. However, for those of us who enjoy the fast pace that the C&C games provide, this is a perfect addition to the series. Although the impact of Generals will not be as great as the original Tiberian Dawn or Red Alert, Generals is still one of the most polished entries in the series.
Rating:
Summary: If you read only one review, make it this one
Review: first the bad news,
If you are a newbie to this game I assure you as soon as you learn the interface of this game all "normal" computers are cake, they even stop sending units at you, they only make one or two defensive buildings and nobody guards their base. If the other nations of the world were "normal" and fought "normal" the US would declare war on the world and win. The brutal enemies clearly cheat. they make giant tank squadrens and tons of supply harvesters in no time, I end up making a band of freedom fighting tank destroying infantry against the onslaught of tanks. But I always win in the end. There is no navy either but oh well. Now the good stuff, the graphics are great, the music is great, usually the movie at the start of missions is great, running it on high detail slows down it slighty but heres a secret, if you are running it on high detail you are silly honstly, I turned on all the high graphics and you know what they did? Nothing. If they did change the graphics in anyway I would say, who needs more ground lighting, who needs cloud shadows, just suck it up and handle it. All you need is 3D shadows to tell where the helicopters are. It is fun; the units can do diffrernt things, and when things die they don't just disappear, they go out with a bang. The game is much more serious which is more fun. but the missions are all the same,
OH NO the terrorists have a base where they are making WEAPONS! REAL WEAPONS! so destroy their base end mission. its cool you can have multi-superweapons. It's mainly cool all around. Though I havent yet tried the multiplayer I will. WORTH THE MONEY.
Rating:
Summary: The best game i have played, but very aggrevating
Review: I waited for this game at least a month, and when it came out i bought it and downloaded it in the computer. I push play and a error pops up on the screen, so the next day i decide to give customer service a call, to find out that my computer is to slow.
This is the reason the game gets a 4 star is because the game takes so much memory for u to play.
Thank God that my brother has a faster computer. This time it worked. And so far this has been the best game i have played. It has everything nukes,takes,everything.I have been impressed with the whole game when i finally got to play.
I recommend it to anyone that has a fast computer,and if u do bye it i think you'll get your moneys worth.
Rating:
Summary: Very pleased
Review: I have been a fan of Westwood Studios' Command & Conquer series since it first debuted in 95. I must say that I continue to grow as a fan. The graphics are incredible as you can now rotate the angle 360 degrees as well as zoom in & out to examine the high detail that each unit possesses. Great for LAN party team games!!
Rating:
Summary: Cautionary note
Review: This is a great game for multiplayer, the only one of this game series that I've actually gotten into as much as my friends. I just want to add to the warnings of others that this game really, really, wants a high end system for highest visual quality of play and faster game speeds. My old 1GHz Athlon cpu with a geforce 2 graphics card and a gig of ram runs fairly slowly at all but the lowest visual settings. So watch out if you have an older graphics card like I do.
Rating:
Summary: A Great RTS Game
Review: To be honeset I have owned Red Alert 2 for quite some time and just never said anything about it publicly until now. This game is great! Much better then Red Alert or even Tiberian Sun, Red Alert 2 keeps a basic concept of all Command and Conquer games but enhances the fun and gameplay in it. The storyline is very well put together even though it's not very realistic. The storyline is simple: The Soviet Union is invading the United States and all of Europe in a revenge attempt from the first war they lost in the original Red Alert. There are 2 campaigns in which you can play. You can play as the Allies and stop the Soviets and destroy them or play as the Soviets and conquer America and the rest of the world. Both campaigns are very interactive and fun in which you fight in major cities throughout the world such as New York, Washington D.C., Miami, St.Louis, Colorado Springs, Paris, Moscow and many more and fight in countries like the United States, France, Russia, Poland, Mexico, Cuba and other territories. Much of the fighting is in an urban enviroments. You can garrison buildings and destroy famous landmarks.
Each side, the Allies and Soviets have their own special units. They both have the basic infantry unit: The American G.I. and the Soviet Conscript. The difference is that the G.I. is stronger and costs more, while Conscipts are weak and cheap to build in mass numbers. Soviet tanks have stronger armor but Allied tanks can have more firepower like Prism or Mirage Tanks. The building is easy: buy it and place it on the ground and go up the tech-tree to become more powerful. Basiclly you build and kill in every mission which can become boring but each mission has its own purpose and which units to build. Each side has a navy and airforce as well, however the American air power is much more powerful then the Soviet Air Force. Getting money is simple by building miners and collecting ore to build buildings, base defense, soldiers etc. The units are not as balanced as they are in Tiberian Sun which makes it more unique for both sides. Each side has superweapons like nuclear missiles or weather storms and even invincible devices or teleporting machines.
There are cut-scene videos in between missions which are very entertaining to watch. Real Actors! *WARNING*Known to be cheesy though. Overall the single-player game is excellent and the graphics are very good and better then Starcraft and the previous Command and Conquer games. Their is great color and building details.
The multiplayer on the internet is good and you can play as 8 differnet nations and have up to 8 players per game. The skirmishes are fun(not internet.) The same details apply and you can play different forms like free for all or deathmatches. The internet is not as well rounded as Starcrafts but still fun. Overall multiplayer is fun. The sound in the game is good and has different mixes to it and the units talk when you click on them. The game concept is fun and controlling hundreds of units can be a challenge but exciting. There is even a basic training course to help you. This game has everything a RTS should have and I have no complaints.
Rating:
Gamplay- A
Single-Player Missions- A
Multiplayer- B+
Skirmishes- A-
Sound- B
Replay Value- A+
Overall- A
THIS GAME RULES AND IS THE BEST RTS I HAVE PLAYED!
Rating: 
Summary: Frustratingly bad AI, but all else is fair and good
Review: This game frustrates me. Games are not supposed to do that. I like a challenge but I have noticed that the poor intelligence of the individual units, combined with the horribly clunky interface makes for a frustratingly frantic click-fest. The units will make poor decisions on when they attack the enemy for example; you might order your fleet of tanks to move to a location, but when they get attacked, the tanks will usually ignore them and wait for you to tell them what to do. In long games with many tasks to handle at once, this gets annoying, and you will end up losing whole armies because your units wont fight back on their own, instead they sit their idle. In some cases, your supply gatherers will be under fire, but instead of retreating, they continue their routes and ultimately explode. The worst thing is that the game wont warn you when your units are attacked or taking damage, only your buildings. You only know that you are attacked when you lose a unit. By that time you are toast anyway. You have to keep an eye on an impossibly small area map that will give you one small red radar "blip" when you are attacked. If you fail to see that, you fail to come out without casualties. Giving commands to units is like pulling teeth. You cannot have units patrol an area like you can in the Starcraft or Warcraft games. You can only have units guard and area, in which case they will simply sit idle and take fire, only returning fire when the enemy is within range. This is laughable. Setting waypoints for units is also clunky.
One more thing really irritated me. My buddy had a stealth unit in my base setting demolition charges on my buildings. One by one they exploded, but I had no idea that my base was being destroyed because I was too busy micromanaging my dopey units somewhere else. I didn't even know what was going on until I tried to select my jets, but they were not selecting. That's when I looked over to the airbase to see why and realized that my base was 80% ashes and debris. There were no warnings or anything. It's that lack of game polish that is making me sell this game. Otherwise the graphics, sound, and overall funfactor are all good. It's fun to play on the LAN, but still frustrating. I know my way around this game well and still yell at the screen, telling my stupid units to move. It is this fact that takes away from the strategic element and turns this game into a finger aching click-fest. Whoever can build the most units in a given time will win, hands down. I enjoy anything from Blizzard much more. If this game simply used Blizzards RTS interface, it would really shine, but since your options are limited and so is the intelligence of your units, you are out of luck and expect to be screaming at your monitor more that once.
Three and a half stars is accurate
Rating:
Summary: What is the difference?
Review: I have played the C&C series, and I have a question: what is the difference between Generals and all the other C&C games. I have to agree with the CLICK CLICK CLICK theory, that is the way C&C has been and always will be:( basically the game is about 3 races: US, china, and the "global liberation army" (terrorist). The story for the US and China missions is that the GLA is coming and and you must destroy them. I story for the GLA missions is the US and china are coming and you must destroy them. The missions are encredibly easy even compared to the other C&C games. Generals does have its Pros, though. Sometimes building mass armies of Paladin tanks and charging in the enemy base with guns blazing and no strategy can be fun, but the effect soon wares off.
So to in summary of the game.....:
Pro's: 3d graphics(first time ever in C&C game), graphics, SOME gameplay
Con's: no strategy involved, horrible AI, and no difference in any of the other games. I can truely say that I thought this game would be different, and might have more strategy then "whoever build the most wins," but it is exactly the same. this game could have been a LOT more fun and strategic, but westwood made it just another Red Alert with 3d graphics:(
|
