User Score
2.0

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 630 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 72 out of 630

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Aug 14, 2010
    0
    Purely and simply this is NOT Command and Conquer. No base building, no resource management, and no strategy at all. Just pump out a bunch of cannon fodder and if they die just pump out a few more at no cost. Joe Kucan is the only noteworthy actor and even he phones it in. The cutscenes are just bad and not in the usual so cheesy its good way. The DRM is just the cherry on this giant ****Purely and simply this is NOT Command and Conquer. No base building, no resource management, and no strategy at all. Just pump out a bunch of cannon fodder and if they die just pump out a few more at no cost. Joe Kucan is the only noteworthy actor and even he phones it in. The cutscenes are just bad and not in the usual so cheesy its good way. The DRM is just the cherry on this giant **** sundae. As a strategy game it's below average at best, and as a C&C game it's EA taking the franchise behind the shed and putting both barrels between it's eyes. Expand
  2. ShaneL.
    Apr 19, 2010
    3
    Okay so I have played C&C since the beging so I am well and truly a fan, I have played all of the saga with the expansions. Since EA took over with Generals and Zero Hour (which was okay but had no cut-scenes) they have done nothing but ruin the game, When they released C&C3 and Kanes Wrath I thought WOW they have actually hit themselves over the head and made it feel more original , Okay so I have played C&C since the beging so I am well and truly a fan, I have played all of the saga with the expansions. Since EA took over with Generals and Zero Hour (which was okay but had no cut-scenes) they have done nothing but ruin the game, When they released C&C3 and Kanes Wrath I thought WOW they have actually hit themselves over the head and made it feel more original , which did well I was not so keen on RA3 really it was okay but not as good as RA2. With C&C4 however i don't have a clue what they were thinking although a brave move I feel they have failed terribly this game totally ruins the concept of C&C possibly one of the best RTS Sagas of all time I'm very dissapointed with my purchase, But I am going to try and get used to it and see if I can enjoy it in anyway. Now for die hard C7C fan out there I would recommend not bothering honestly your missing nothing, As for EA they seriously need to rethink what they are doing bring back the old WestWood team and let them show you how its done. Expand
  3. JamesW.
    Apr 17, 2010
    3
    As both an RTS fan and a huge C&C fan I have to ask what exactly the hell EA were doing when they released this, but of course the answer is once again rushing a product out of the door in an effort to make more money. The gameplay is so vastly different from any other C&C game it might as well not be related at all. The idea of "counter" units takes a fairly basic element of previous As both an RTS fan and a huge C&C fan I have to ask what exactly the hell EA were doing when they released this, but of course the answer is once again rushing a product out of the door in an effort to make more money. The gameplay is so vastly different from any other C&C game it might as well not be related at all. The idea of "counter" units takes a fairly basic element of previous games and dumbs it down to a level where all tactics are removed. And the story? all i can say is what story? Kane seems to have undergone a personality transplant, ignoring every goal he's ever worked for in the past in an effort to "ascend", although what this ascension is nobody knows as the endings make absolutely no sense at all. Honestly if this is how EA are going to treat such a long running and massively popular series I don't think I'll ever buy another of their games. Expand
  4. Jul 21, 2012
    3
    A bad ending of a great game series. The idiot and boring storytelling, also the idiot and boring story, the missing base building and management, the missing resource management and also the missing of the money are killing this game. You have only 1 "building" (called "Crawler") that can move like a big robot. You can choose from 3 Crawler types: Defensive, Attacking and Support. I thinkA bad ending of a great game series. The idiot and boring storytelling, also the idiot and boring story, the missing base building and management, the missing resource management and also the missing of the money are killing this game. You have only 1 "building" (called "Crawler") that can move like a big robot. You can choose from 3 Crawler types: Defensive, Attacking and Support. I think it's a total idiot idea, because you have nothing to defend. Only the Crawler maybe, but you can call another Crawler to the battlefield anytime if you want (in Singleplayer). After you deploy your Crawler, you can train/build your units for nothing. Yes, for nothing. There is no money in the game. Just click on the icon of the wanted unit and wait until it's ready. I think the developers wanted a game like Dawn of War 2. But hey, DoW2 is a real-time strategy with a huge tactical part (e.g. cover system). Where is this tactical part in C&C4? Nowhere! The multiplayer/skirmish has the same problem. It wanted to be like in DoW2 or Company of Heroes's "capture the big outposts to win" mode. But it's not work in this game. After the amazing C&C3, it's a big rubish. I can only say: don't buy this game, if you want a good strategy. If you are a masochist, maybe it's your game. Maybe. Expand
  5. Dec 26, 2012
    0
    EA just totally ruined command and conquer. This game is one of the most disappointing strategy games i ever played. The game play is total **** You can make good game without base management (DoW II), but in this case its total garbage and Command and Conquer is 50% about base building. In compare to tiberian sun of even tiberian wars this game is total WtF.
  6. Mar 20, 2013
    3
    A garbage ending o a phenomenal series. The only thing familiar here are the cut scenes as everything else has been remodeled from scratch. This makes it not c&c at all. The game play is shoddy, the learning curve steep and unit count very low. You have to be online in order to progress too making it frustrating as hell when your internet connection is lost for few seconds 40 minutes intoA garbage ending o a phenomenal series. The only thing familiar here are the cut scenes as everything else has been remodeled from scratch. This makes it not c&c at all. The game play is shoddy, the learning curve steep and unit count very low. You have to be online in order to progress too making it frustrating as hell when your internet connection is lost for few seconds 40 minutes into a level. TL;DR Too Don't buy Expand
  7. Jayfive
    Mar 23, 2010
    3
    It's a shame to watch a gaming company use a beloved franchise as a test tube for a new concept in gaming. If you want to create a new idea for the existing story (Renegade) go right ahead, but be honest about it. Suggesting that this is a direct sequel to C&C is laughable. The acting is ludicrous and the story leaves giant holes in the plot. The complete lack of effort in making a It's a shame to watch a gaming company use a beloved franchise as a test tube for a new concept in gaming. If you want to create a new idea for the existing story (Renegade) go right ahead, but be honest about it. Suggesting that this is a direct sequel to C&C is laughable. The acting is ludicrous and the story leaves giant holes in the plot. The complete lack of effort in making a true end to the series was lost and cannot be rebuilt. The game itself has positive elements, albeit experimental ones, but in the end it could have been a success as a separate gaming series. The kick in the face is that after all the waiting and great previous stories, we are left with a blemish on the name of an otherwise exemplary series. Expand
  8. MikeT
    Mar 25, 2010
    3
    The one who decided starting a game at lowest settings 800*600 should have been sacked last year. A lot of the fire the game have for "less than adequate" graphics comes from this ****** up setting?!?! That aside, this isn't c&c at all. This game is like the movie Batman and Robin, a game that should never have existed at all. The next game should begin with Kane waking up from the The one who decided starting a game at lowest settings 800*600 should have been sacked last year. A lot of the fire the game have for "less than adequate" graphics comes from this ****** up setting?!?! That aside, this isn't c&c at all. This game is like the movie Batman and Robin, a game that should never have existed at all. The next game should begin with Kane waking up from the nightmare of c&c 4. Expand
  9. DRitz
    Apr 12, 2010
    3
    The game itself would not have been that bad if it were a new IP or an offshoot of the C&C Brand (Like a multi-player only side-game) but C&C 4 was supposed to be the grand fanale of the traditional RTS, not some knock off. They should have kept the original formula and polished every speck of dust off of it. Personally I always like the C&C format of RTS, so I was serverly disappointed The game itself would not have been that bad if it were a new IP or an offshoot of the C&C Brand (Like a multi-player only side-game) but C&C 4 was supposed to be the grand fanale of the traditional RTS, not some knock off. They should have kept the original formula and polished every speck of dust off of it. Personally I always like the C&C format of RTS, so I was serverly disappointed when I realized that the C&C franchise died with a whimper. Expand
  10. Jan 14, 2011
    3
    I don't know if I even want to finish this. This was a giant waste of my 5$ off of a steam deal. It feels like something some no-name developer puts out, but with decent graphics. There's no resource management. All it is is rock/paper/scissors, but with 3 or 4 different people putting their hands in. As everyone else has stated, this is not C&C. It doesn't deserve to be anywhereI don't know if I even want to finish this. This was a giant waste of my 5$ off of a steam deal. It feels like something some no-name developer puts out, but with decent graphics. There's no resource management. All it is is rock/paper/scissors, but with 3 or 4 different people putting their hands in. As everyone else has stated, this is not C&C. It doesn't deserve to be anywhere near the same shelf as the C&C franchise. This is one of those games that you find in a bargain bin at Menards or Fleet Farm. Expand
  11. Feb 27, 2011
    5
    It's not a terrible game standing by itself, but it's barely worth 10 dollars with the C&C title on it. Even when standing on it's own merits, it's still quite a generic game, and the cutscenes are dry and uninteresting. Kane, normally an intimidating and wise character, feels dead in this one. He doesn't have that shroud of mystery that was normally maintained in previous series. If theIt's not a terrible game standing by itself, but it's barely worth 10 dollars with the C&C title on it. Even when standing on it's own merits, it's still quite a generic game, and the cutscenes are dry and uninteresting. Kane, normally an intimidating and wise character, feels dead in this one. He doesn't have that shroud of mystery that was normally maintained in previous series. If the game had a better story and began BEFORE Kane allied with GDI, along with standard RTS elements, it would be worth an 8.5. Get a better engine instead of that crappy generals engine, and it would get a 10. On it's own right now, it get's a 5. Expand
  12. Sep 4, 2014
    0
    The worst C&C game ever, they did crap in this game, THIS IS NOT COMMAND & CONQUER THAT I KNOW ! Don´t waste time with this. The others C&C games is much better !
  13. Jun 26, 2014
    0
    Once upon a time, a friend an I made a very bad uninformed purchase. We bought C&C4 thinking it would be a better C&C3. The first and last time we played this, an inside joke was born. The only thing I remember about this game was that horribly laggy cutscene.. OMG A MISISLE!1!11111111!!
  14. May 9, 2013
    0
    Dont! STOP! these are the words i said as my memories of C&C where raped. I can say little about this game that is positive, I am just glad i bought it for 1 buck. I really dont understand how this game even got a 64 from the critics.

    AVOID AT ALL COSTS, NOT EVEN WORTH IT FOR THE STORY.
  15. Dec 11, 2012
    0
    Legitimately one of the worst games I have ever had the misfortune of playing. The game is terrible, the gameplay is terrible and the graphics are terrible. It chugs and I get slow down on my rig which runs Skyrim on ultra at 60fps. This is inexcusable.

    I tried so hard to play this game but I couldn't manage more than an hour, it's that bad. What a total excuse for a command and
    Legitimately one of the worst games I have ever had the misfortune of playing. The game is terrible, the gameplay is terrible and the graphics are terrible. It chugs and I get slow down on my rig which runs Skyrim on ultra at 60fps. This is inexcusable.

    I tried so hard to play this game but I couldn't manage more than an hour, it's that bad. What a total excuse for a command and conquer game. Avoid like it will eat your first born.
    Expand
  16. Oct 14, 2014
    1
    Oh god, the horror. C&C is a RTS series about base building and military expansion. This sequel completely guts those elements, but you don't find that out until after you've bought it. What a horrible, truly pathetic end to the series. It only even gets 1 point due to having Kain in it. Were it not for that, I'd have rated it a 0.
  17. May 17, 2013
    3
    Where do I begin. The worse always-online DRM? Maybe. The lack of any resource management? Also a good point. But the worst thing remains that the completely messed up a story that was so interesting to follow in the previous installment of the C&C series. Also, the units look worse and less realistic than they used to. The strategic element of the game that made C&C3 great is also mostlyWhere do I begin. The worse always-online DRM? Maybe. The lack of any resource management? Also a good point. But the worst thing remains that the completely messed up a story that was so interesting to follow in the previous installment of the C&C series. Also, the units look worse and less realistic than they used to. The strategic element of the game that made C&C3 great is also mostly gone. It is so sad that a game with so much potential is completely messed up by a incompetent development team. C&C4 had some good ideas, but they are just implemented in a very wrong way. Expand
  18. Jun 15, 2013
    0
    Hmm the older Commmand and Conquer Games are so much bether then this part auf C&C!
    This Game is waste of Money and time. I didnt like the "Commandopoints".
  19. Jun 15, 2013
    0
    Original game won't start. If i cack it i can play....
    Original game won't start. If i cack it i can play....
    Original game won't start. If i cack it i can play....
  20. Aug 11, 2013
    0
    This is not Command & Conquer. It likely started as a different project, but the suits quickly realized the only way they'd make their money back was to slap a more familiar name on the box. Sadly there is so much more wrong with this game it's hard to know where to start.

    Firstly, there is no base construction, which is kind of a big thing in Command & Conquer. Some poor chap probably
    This is not Command & Conquer. It likely started as a different project, but the suits quickly realized the only way they'd make their money back was to slap a more familiar name on the box. Sadly there is so much more wrong with this game it's hard to know where to start.

    Firstly, there is no base construction, which is kind of a big thing in Command & Conquer. Some poor chap probably had the innocent idea of making an RTS/MOBA hybrid, but the way this was executed here is a disaster. The gameplay is simply not fun. At all. The controls are sloppy, you are limited to only several units at a time, and the horrible graphics don't help. In fact the graphics are so bad you can hardly distinguish between your own units. Fun fact: the graphics are actually worse than the previous game, Command & Conquer 3, released three years earlier. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE EA?

    To top it all off, the levels are all dull and the story is downright boring. The campy video narration between each mission was the highlight of previous Command & Conquer games. But not here. Like the rest of this game, the video clips look cheap and uninspired. Even the sexy girls are gone in this one. Guess they wouldn't go anywhere near this stinker. Kane is left facing off against a stereotypical angry old fat woman. That is pretty much the extent of the cast. I cannot stress this enough: DO NOT BUY THIS GAME. EA clearly spent more money buying off critics than they did on the making of this atrocity. There is a reason the entire dev team got fired shortly after releasing this game, and good riddance. You know you have problems when your product doesn't measure up to EA's standards. But it also means this pile of crap will not be receiving any more bug fixes.
    Expand
  21. Sep 6, 2013
    2
    This was a shameless cash in on the franchise on the part of EA with the developers being forced to change what was intended as a country-exclusive experiment into a game in its own right. It corrupts every single aspect of what is recognisable about Command and Conquer and has a twist ending that just does not work in any way, shape or form. They created a weird DotA clone with even lessThis was a shameless cash in on the franchise on the part of EA with the developers being forced to change what was intended as a country-exclusive experiment into a game in its own right. It corrupts every single aspect of what is recognisable about Command and Conquer and has a twist ending that just does not work in any way, shape or form. They created a weird DotA clone with even less involvement than aforementioned game with none of the excitement or entertainment value of any of the previous games.

    This ending to the series was not earned, well designed or properly executed and just shows EA up for how disrespectful of the very people they are marketing their games to are. If you find anyone who actually thinks this is a worthy finish to the series, immediately force them to play through every previous game until they see sense.

    The only good thing I will say is that it provides a much needed variation on the standard "which side will you choose?" format, but even that is only a slightly positive thing to say, because it initially forces you into the position of a GDI member instead of fully exploring the possibilities of who you will side with and why?

    Oh, and to everyone saying that change needs to be embraced, you need to recognise the difference between change and the complete redesign of something to the point where it ceases to follow a format that, whilst not perfect was certainly not broken in any way shape or form, and is instead a DotA/Dawn of War 2 rip-off. Furthermore, they've always been changing things here and there, but at the very core it has kept the same format of resource collection, force building and variation in unit types, with super weapons when you wanna be extra-nasty. Lastly: it's an old franchise which many people, including myself, would have grown up playing and are why we're hardcore gamers today. I was 6 when the first game came out and I played it way back then. People are going to be a little upset over a company saying "we couldn't care less about a franchise that is the core reason you're a returning customer and help keep us fed, we just want to turn out an ineffectual finalisation to something we have blatant disregard for".
    Expand
  22. Feb 23, 2014
    7
    C&C 4 is far from the old clasic C&C games. There's barely anything in common with the exception of the characters and story. However it does not mean it's a bad game.

    When playing the game you should not see it as C&C but rather as a new game, another series. Your goal is to combine different types of units to defeat the opponent's army. Pro: Interesting concept and fun leveling
    C&C 4 is far from the old clasic C&C games. There's barely anything in common with the exception of the characters and story. However it does not mean it's a bad game.

    When playing the game you should not see it as C&C but rather as a new game, another series. Your goal is to combine different types of units to defeat the opponent's army.

    Pro: Interesting concept and fun leveling system

    Con: Nothing in common with its previous games, outdated graphics

    Worth buying at sale but I'd hold on to the cash at full price
    Expand
  23. Jan 15, 2014
    3
    Holy **** this game is terrible! First of all, you can't even build a base like you could in Tiberium wars and earlier. Gameplay is completely changed, EA better be joking about that this is the last game in the series. I will have to say, the music is good but honestly, besides the music, this game is ****
  24. Sep 20, 2014
    0
    I cannot even start to describe how bad this “game” is. It doesn't run at all on windows 8 or 8.1 and it is barely playable on windows 7, how is this even possible? If you launch the game from Origin client you still have to register it again and log in after that to play, if that wasn't bad enough you have to stay connected to internet while you play the single player and if for someI cannot even start to describe how bad this “game” is. It doesn't run at all on windows 8 or 8.1 and it is barely playable on windows 7, how is this even possible? If you launch the game from Origin client you still have to register it again and log in after that to play, if that wasn't bad enough you have to stay connected to internet while you play the single player and if for some reason you get disconnected from EA servers (which happens a lot) you can't advance after a successful mission you will just see a main menu screen and a message saying ”Please connect to network". After you do connect back you still have to play the same mission again.

    There is no balance in this game at all because you can win every situation if you just have a nod cyber commando, you can hack into any unit and steal it. After it is destroyed your commando will come out of the wreckage and you can hack into another unit and same goes on and on as long as you stay patient. I just uninstalled the game after seeing too much of this crap.

    This is not even suitable as alpha stage game and the game is broken and will screw up your windows desktop so be ready to put all your icons as they were after you quit the game unless you play full resolution. If you decide to change audio settings the game will crash and so will your windows 7 probably. This must be a joke. This is malware not a game. Not even a bloat ware it's a real malware that does more damage to your computer than any other crap out there. After playing this I have to restart my computer or try to do a few things to fix my Ethernet connection because the game screws it up so I can't use internet after playing it. Sounds lot like a malware to me. Take note that this never happens with any other game or software on my computer so my conclusion is to uninstall the "product". Please do not pay for this in any circumstances.
    Expand
  25. Sep 26, 2014
    3
    Just a mess. I have played all of the C&C RTS games, and enjoyed them all...until I played C&C 4. I played through several battles of the campaign to see if it got better, it didn't. No resource management, just a tedious slow crawl with out the epic battles and strategy typical of a C&C game. Additionally, requiring an always on connection for a single player game is always going toJust a mess. I have played all of the C&C RTS games, and enjoyed them all...until I played C&C 4. I played through several battles of the campaign to see if it got better, it didn't. No resource management, just a tedious slow crawl with out the epic battles and strategy typical of a C&C game. Additionally, requiring an always on connection for a single player game is always going to cost you significant points in my book. It adds nothing in value to the game, and causes all sorts of problems. Terrible job here, EA. Expand
  26. AlisonR
    Mar 20, 2010
    3
    The game plays nothing like a Command and Conquer game. I have come to expect certain things from a C&C game, and all of them were neglected in this game. There is no base building, no real micro managing, no economy or reason to protect one's base. The entire game just becomes a unit spam with 1 large army that moves from node to node. Once your army begins to be countered, you just The game plays nothing like a Command and Conquer game. I have come to expect certain things from a C&C game, and all of them were neglected in this game. There is no base building, no real micro managing, no economy or reason to protect one's base. The entire game just becomes a unit spam with 1 large army that moves from node to node. Once your army begins to be countered, you just kill all of them and spawn the counter for the counter. Losing your MCV has absolutely no effect in the game play either, since it can be respawned soon after. Expand
  27. nothappy
    Mar 28, 2010
    0
    This game somehow tried to force Fawn of War's gameplay mechanic of capturing points and holding them in a tug of war (which even Dawn of war has an annihilation game mode where there are no tug of war and you just kill the other guy) i wouldn't even torrent this game. i'm saying that if this game was FREE i would turn it down. and then on top of it the Draconian DRM which This game somehow tried to force Fawn of War's gameplay mechanic of capturing points and holding them in a tug of war (which even Dawn of war has an annihilation game mode where there are no tug of war and you just kill the other guy) i wouldn't even torrent this game. i'm saying that if this game was FREE i would turn it down. and then on top of it the Draconian DRM which means you have to be connected to the internet at all times to play it only means you are renting this game. when a pirated version works better than the legit one, you have a problem. Expand
  28. Aug 12, 2011
    3
    One of the most boring RTS games I've ever played. It's downright disgraceful that they could go from C&C3 (a pretty damn good game) to this piece of crap. There's no base building, no resource management, the units are boring, and there's almost no strategy beyond pointing your units at the enemy. Seriously, how do you mess up Command and Conquer SO badly? On top of all that, they've madeOne of the most boring RTS games I've ever played. It's downright disgraceful that they could go from C&C3 (a pretty damn good game) to this piece of crap. There's no base building, no resource management, the units are boring, and there's almost no strategy beyond pointing your units at the enemy. Seriously, how do you mess up Command and Conquer SO badly? On top of all that, they've made the unit designs look worse. The sleek and dangerous looking stealth tank from C&C3 is now a blocky, over-sized mess. As I've said, no more base building. Instead, you have one mobile command center that produces all of your units. Now if the units and their strategies were more sophisticated, this might have worked. But no. Instead all you have to do is produce a mix of units (which takes about 1 minute) and send them after the enemy. This is even more boring than it sounds. If you want a good RTS, look elsewhere. Expand
  29. Jul 22, 2013
    0
    This game took everything that made the originals great and fun! Can't even do tiberian harvesting anymore and only getting three types of MIVs. The concept of the 5v5 were great, but that didn't even work out well. Command and Conquer 3 was much better than this game and it's sad to this franchise going nowhere.
  30. ScottH
    Mar 20, 2010
    1
    Yet another disappointment from EA where they believe you don't buy their product, you only rent it. Their 'play online' only (even in single player) is a complete rip off. Whatever you do, don't buy this game! Don't reward EA's bad behavior by giving them your hard earned money. If it sells poorly enough, hopefully they'll get the message.
  31. RyanR.
    Mar 20, 2010
    2
    An unfortunate shadow of its former self , no buildings , no real tiberium . Starting afresh may of worked for an off shoot of the tiberium canon but to change everything so significantly for the finale of an amazing trilogy is a slap in the face for all tiberium fans worldwide. I can only hope EA realise this and realise their next game with the old mechanics rather than use their loyal An unfortunate shadow of its former self , no buildings , no real tiberium . Starting afresh may of worked for an off shoot of the tiberium canon but to change everything so significantly for the finale of an amazing trilogy is a slap in the face for all tiberium fans worldwide. I can only hope EA realise this and realise their next game with the old mechanics rather than use their loyal fan base a guinea pigs on a game very likely to fail. Expand
  32. HJJ
    Mar 20, 2010
    1
    Not a bad game but nothing really that new when you consider the competition. Whatever aspect of the game you consider, there is always a game out there that does it better. Personally, i'd stick with RA3. The big reason for the low score is EA's woeful decision to once again inconvenience their paying customers for the actions of pirates. You have to log on to EA servers which Not a bad game but nothing really that new when you consider the competition. Whatever aspect of the game you consider, there is always a game out there that does it better. Personally, i'd stick with RA3. The big reason for the low score is EA's woeful decision to once again inconvenience their paying customers for the actions of pirates. You have to log on to EA servers which is problematic and much like the nightmare that is trying to play Assassin's Creed 2. An average game that can't be played if a) you have a problem with your connection b) EA have a problem with their servers c) Server traffic is busy at peak times. I'd pay £10 for it but not £29. Expand
  33. AndrewN.
    Mar 22, 2010
    0
    It's funny, it was Command and Conquer 3 which actually gave me hope that maybe somebody in EA games actually has a clue. I suspect the others found these people however and burned them at the stake, after which they made this poor excuse for a game. How do you even classify it? Certainly not as an RTS. Even less so as a Command and Conquer game. If you changed the names of It's funny, it was Command and Conquer 3 which actually gave me hope that maybe somebody in EA games actually has a clue. I suspect the others found these people however and burned them at the stake, after which they made this poor excuse for a game. How do you even classify it? Certainly not as an RTS. Even less so as a Command and Conquer game. If you changed the names of everything and hid the faces of the characters, then gave the game to a fan of the series I'd bet they wouldn't realize they were playing a Command and Conquer game. Expand
  34. AndyC
    Mar 20, 2010
    0
    I can't give this game a low enough score to justify its existence... it's just pure rubbish through and through. From the disastrous new system they came up with to the economics, the unit caps and the play style it ISNT Command & Conquer and it ISNT worth your time or money. The unit cap is so low that even the pc version feels like a limiting console release from 4 years ago, I can't give this game a low enough score to justify its existence... it's just pure rubbish through and through. From the disastrous new system they came up with to the economics, the unit caps and the play style it ISNT Command & Conquer and it ISNT worth your time or money. The unit cap is so low that even the pc version feels like a limiting console release from 4 years ago, they did it better in C&C3 than they did in 4 which surely says to me that EA seem to learn nothing from the community and decide to just completely ignore it except when it serves their purposes. The only thing that made me buy this game was to finally see a conclusion to the Tiberium universe's story and even then I'm having to grin and bare each and every mission just to get to the next cutscene. AVOID if at all possible. Expand
  35. WilI
    Mar 20, 2010
    0
    This is the WORST game I've ever played. I don't care if this game is different from old C&C; I'm ok with changing the formula. The problem with C&C4 is that the new gameplay design they came up with doesn't work at all. The result is a game that lacks any merit, I kid you not. This is the 1st game I played that has zero merits. Some of the worsts games I've This is the WORST game I've ever played. I don't care if this game is different from old C&C; I'm ok with changing the formula. The problem with C&C4 is that the new gameplay design they came up with doesn't work at all. The result is a game that lacks any merit, I kid you not. This is the 1st game I played that has zero merits. Some of the worsts games I've played before had at least some sort of saving grace, some sort of merit. C&C4 does not. It just isn't fun at all. Expand
  36. RobG.
    Mar 19, 2010
    1
    Way to kill the C&C universe EA, if you wanted to milk money guess this was the way huh. The must always be online game play is as much a joke as UBISOFT's one for Silent Hunter 5. The constant Crashing, the extremely poor graphics on units, the lack of the Staple items of the Command and Conquer universe such as Base Building, Tiberium Harvesting etc. All add up to give this an Epic Way to kill the C&C universe EA, if you wanted to milk money guess this was the way huh. The must always be online game play is as much a joke as UBISOFT's one for Silent Hunter 5. The constant Crashing, the extremely poor graphics on units, the lack of the Staple items of the Command and Conquer universe such as Base Building, Tiberium Harvesting etc. All add up to give this an Epic Fail. Thanks for nothing and thanks for ruining a great franchise with over 15 years in it. Expand
  37. AdamB.
    Mar 21, 2010
    0
    Again, EA has proven it doesn't have a clue what good gameplay is and that they are run by bean counters and marketing morons. The gameplay is pathetic. Each campaign takes at *most* 5 hours to play through and is 7 missions long (after the 3 tutorial missions). Gameplay is as far away from C&C as it could possibly be. It is Real Time Tactical, not RTS. They took gameplay points from Again, EA has proven it doesn't have a clue what good gameplay is and that they are run by bean counters and marketing morons. The gameplay is pathetic. Each campaign takes at *most* 5 hours to play through and is 7 missions long (after the 3 tutorial missions). Gameplay is as far away from C&C as it could possibly be. It is Real Time Tactical, not RTS. They took gameplay points from multiple games and mashed them together without realizing what makes it work for those other games. The units are almost all rehashed from the rest of the series (event the Mammoth Mk II from Tiberian Sun). There are no actors that you can recognize in the game outside of Joe Kucan. This game smacks of least effort possible and feels like less than a quarter of a full game. Don't waste your money on this game. Expand
  38. BenM.
    Mar 29, 2010
    5
    Removing the title, and analysing this as a gaming concept in it's own right, CNC4 does have a few new and interesting things to offer. The skirmish mode, while rigid in some areas does allow for some new and interesting tactical decisions with a much greater emphasis on teamwork and larger battles. The crawler idea in itself in interesting and the option are relatively fresh to keep Removing the title, and analysing this as a gaming concept in it's own right, CNC4 does have a few new and interesting things to offer. The skirmish mode, while rigid in some areas does allow for some new and interesting tactical decisions with a much greater emphasis on teamwork and larger battles. The crawler idea in itself in interesting and the option are relatively fresh to keep me interested in playing this. All I have to tell myself is that EA accidentally named this a CNC game instead of a brand new franchise. Taking it as a CNC, the game is riddled with faults. The fact that you have to be online to play is extremely frustrating if you're more of a single player person who's in it for the conclusion of the epic Tiberium arc, which, to be honest was a complete and utter let down. The campaigns for both side are horrendously short and fail to meet the standards set by CNC games past. Even Kane himself seem to only be pulling out a half arsed job. So much for an epic conclusion. In addition, the unlocking mechanic is brutal on newer players, who don't have the arsenal at their disposal to take on two other NPCs with essentially a Tier 1 unit spam, almost to the point of forcing co-op play. Indeed, for Skirmish mission, the lack of level matching means that a completely new player and his lvl 1 GDI offense crawler gets his ass handed to him by the lvl 20 Nod player. The fact that in Skirmish you can no longer be GDI vs GDI etc. is also a major ball ache. While I can appreciate what the devs were trying to pull off, something new and relatively innovative, they should have left the last of the Tiberium saga alone with the old mechanics. The story explains why all the tib is receding, but that doesn't mean you couldn't have used a RA3 style mechanic of having tib mines or something. The lack of a proper harvester in a CNC RTS game? Come on guys, seriously? If you're new to the franchise, I'd suggest giving it a look and renting it, as there are some good ideas, but if you're a die hard, probably best to stay away. As a game: 7 As the ending to an epic story arc or a well established franchise: 2. Expand
  39. DavidE.
    Mar 28, 2010
    1
    I have played C & C since 1995 when it first came out. I was 35 Years old then and I thought it was a better invention than the wheel or the discovery of fire by man - even I played it on my antique DX 100Mz desktop computer Ie. 10% of 1 GHz process power with 8mb RAM!!!! But C & C 1 was the Best, Counterstrike, Red Alert 1, Red Alert 2, Tiberian Sun, C & C 3 excellent, Kanes Wrath Great! I have played C & C since 1995 when it first came out. I was 35 Years old then and I thought it was a better invention than the wheel or the discovery of fire by man - even I played it on my antique DX 100Mz desktop computer Ie. 10% of 1 GHz process power with 8mb RAM!!!! But C & C 1 was the Best, Counterstrike, Red Alert 1, Red Alert 2, Tiberian Sun, C & C 3 excellent, Kanes Wrath Great! and Red Alert 3 BUT C & C 4 is BAD!!!!! Very Disappointing!!! No More Resources; Population, soldier Limits, Constant Internet Connection - Its BAD!!!! Disappointing and Graphics Terrible!!! Bad Work EA C & C 4 I wont play it. Just Commiserate the last 15 years since 1995. You went out with a WHIMPER! not a Bang!!! Expand
  40. Lizard
    Mar 18, 2010
    0
    well done EA, you've just successfully wrecked the most famous RTS franchise in PC gaming history. Moronic gameplay (that has nothing in common with the rest of the series) stolen from various other currently popular games coupled with a ridiculous DRM system that demands players always be online even when playing singleplayer are two huge, enormous, unforgiveable mistakes, they well done EA, you've just successfully wrecked the most famous RTS franchise in PC gaming history. Moronic gameplay (that has nothing in common with the rest of the series) stolen from various other currently popular games coupled with a ridiculous DRM system that demands players always be online even when playing singleplayer are two huge, enormous, unforgiveable mistakes, they couldn't have done a better job of destroying this game if they'd actually tried. EA could get better results if they hired monkeys, C&C4 is an utter disgrace and when they pull the servers down after about 6 months all those poor souls who payed out good money for this rubbish won't be able to play it even if they wanted to. Expand
  41. TonyJ
    Mar 26, 2010
    0
    I played every C&C game out there. I loved Red Alert and Red Alert 2 for game play was amazing! Generals i continue to play to this date for it has what the other C&Cs had and quite enjoyed building bases where ever I wanted. C&C3 i enjoyed and had amazing graphics to go with the game and the fine addition of the Scrin to the game i liked and is my favorite team (GDI mammoth tanks are I played every C&C game out there. I loved Red Alert and Red Alert 2 for game play was amazing! Generals i continue to play to this date for it has what the other C&Cs had and quite enjoyed building bases where ever I wanted. C&C3 i enjoyed and had amazing graphics to go with the game and the fine addition of the Scrin to the game i liked and is my favorite team (GDI mammoth tanks are cool though). I started to get dissapointed in EA starting C&C Red Alert 3, I thought the graphics were way too cartoony and everything was sized wrong and just out of wack. The gameplay of having coop for missions i didnt find interesting at all for where the stragey in that? You can have a weak player with a strong player and he never learn a thing. C&C is a game of skill and cunning not a game of follow the leader. Then came C&C4 now that was a total let down. Having to be online when espically i live in the county where high-speed net is slow so game is slow for me. Supreme Commander 2 a game that game out pretty much at the same time has far better graphics then this crap. The textures in C&C4 are off and i could make most of these wannabe tanks in seconds on Maya. As a C&C fan and as a animator i say the graphics really sucked but were slightly better then RA3 (that is all i can give the credits for it). I got better graphics playing Final Fantasy Crisis Core on my PSP then C&C4. What a let down that is. Story line for campaigns was too short and pointless. Anyone who gives this above a 4 either hasn't played to many video games or done any animation. The game wasn't worth it and i seen free RTS game look better and have a better game flow. Level caps are fine for some games but C&C was renown for not having the caps and just letting the players pick their style of gameplay. The new pick your command unit play thing limits the players to their playing styles and prevents them from expressing. They should have kept it with the orginal game play or gone down the road of Generals game play. All i can say is that i hope they make C&C Generals 2 but without changing the gameplay. All they should do is update the graphics to be more current and add new units but keep the old. They should add new countries and Generals to the series such as Britian, Russia, and Canada for a change. Make it more like Red Alert style Generals where each country has something unique. Combine what worked in the previous games not combine different style of popular games. Expand
  42. SandyG
    Mar 20, 2010
    3
    I gave this a 3 because i like the storyline it gets you really involved, Yet its totally been derailed, This is not a CNC game and EA have ruined the CNC franchise... The games GUI is poor. Really really Buggy. Theres only one game mode, gets boring after a while.. i got bored of it in the BETA lol.. The story is REALLY REALLY SHORT!. it has a population cap. It was the wrong turn for EA I gave this a 3 because i like the storyline it gets you really involved, Yet its totally been derailed, This is not a CNC game and EA have ruined the CNC franchise... The games GUI is poor. Really really Buggy. Theres only one game mode, gets boring after a while.. i got bored of it in the BETA lol.. The story is REALLY REALLY SHORT!. it has a population cap. It was the wrong turn for EA and i hope they scrap all this carbage and recreate from scratch with after Tiberian Sun in mind.. games like that shook the PC market. and now EA are just giving no time and effort into these games.. Command and Conquer 3 has better graphics then this. I advise you not to waste you money on it, go and pirate it as it has already been cracked. Show EA that its a worthless game. Expand
  43. AndrewM
    Mar 28, 2010
    2
    CQ4 Cannot be as bad as this, surely? Mandatory online registration (even as single player, having paid your money) to play a game that has NOTHING to do with the CQ franchise (except the pointless 'movies'). EA have reduced a strategic army-building-with-resources-and-defence to a run around the map with a squad (twelve units max, six typical... and this is CQ?) to some CQ4 Cannot be as bad as this, surely? Mandatory online registration (even as single player, having paid your money) to play a game that has NOTHING to do with the CQ franchise (except the pointless 'movies'). EA have reduced a strategic army-building-with-resources-and-defence to a run around the map with a squad (twelve units max, six typical... and this is CQ?) to some pointless sites, which you can neither defend nor retain--- because of course you're not allowed to build in CQ4 - or gather resources - or acquire an army - or combine defence, offence and air... or do anything like either a 'pseudo-real' army (combined ops with multiple units) or the original CQ franchise. Never has a game so destroyed a franchise - just as well it was the final one in the 'series'. EA has just lost my vote for RA3 (cartoon nonsense) and CQ4 (pointless squad rush - without the 'rational' gameplay of DOW). Sad. Expand
  44. GlennH
    Apr 10, 2010
    1
    "I want my money back" is all i can say. This is an abysmal massacre of the command & conquer series. The missions are ridiculously irriatating and boring, no real strategy involved, just hurry up and capture the objective before the enemy sends in another mass of units!! Horrendous acting in the cutscenes doesnt help. Storyline is so cheesy I want to hurl. Even the map display before "I want my money back" is all i can say. This is an abysmal massacre of the command & conquer series. The missions are ridiculously irriatating and boring, no real strategy involved, just hurry up and capture the objective before the enemy sends in another mass of units!! Horrendous acting in the cutscenes doesnt help. Storyline is so cheesy I want to hurl. Even the map display before some levels doesnt make sense (the 'pacific' TCN node Nod mission is in the Indian ocean. Only having the ability to command a handful of units, not being able to establish a real 'base' and fighting AI that doesnt have to worry about command points and pumps out endless streams of units is just dumb. Should have to sign into online lobby just to play single player mode. Pathetic game..very dissapointed in this ending to the series. Expand
  45. JosephR.
    Apr 5, 2010
    0
    Like a lot of other angry people, I was one of the original fans when it comes to Command and Conquer. I grew up on it. I was about in 5th grade when the original came out. I just feel an overwhelming need to scream this from my nearest mountain top: This game is garbage! This series basically gave a face to the entire RTS genre and then dissapeared into what would be the you and me Like a lot of other angry people, I was one of the original fans when it comes to Command and Conquer. I grew up on it. I was about in 5th grade when the original came out. I just feel an overwhelming need to scream this from my nearest mountain top: This game is garbage! This series basically gave a face to the entire RTS genre and then dissapeared into what would be the you and me equivalent of a brain fart. First of all, massive online multiplayer experiences are exactly what a gamer is running away from when he plays an RTS game. An RTS is a game that lets you snack whilst playing. A game that lets you half pay attention to a Family Guy episode, and half pay attention to it. You can dissapear into thought while playing an RTS. Mainly, you scheme, plan, hoard, and amass an army that will, when unleashed, dominate. This is a frustrating instinct to have going into CnC4, but not by any means an unreasonable one. They bred us to be like this. Then, in the last $%#^@ inning, they switch the batting order? No.... they start playing soccer? The game is called Tiberium Twighlight, but theres no........ Tiberium? wait, isn't this the game with the Tiberium? You have an MCV... a good old MCV, ah, wait.... is it getting up? and.... walking into battle? Who at EA actually had the power and inclination to sit down, focus on the series, and say to his inferiors, "you know what this base-building, unit-generating, strategy-forming game needs? No bases, meaningless and endless units, and no strategy beyond click click click, with no economy, troop limits (my favorite! who doesn't like troop limits?) and no INCENTIVE to keep playing because your presence on the map can never get any bigger than the paltry limit so why would you command or conquer anything?" If they told Romulus after he brained Remus that, yea, he could start the Roman Empire, but it would never be any bigger than 100 command points, would have no structures, would be born out of this awkwardly gigantic crawling headquarters that is made more vaulnerable by the fact that you have to bring it with you (like an Ipad!), the music would suck, the graphics wouldn;t be any better than the last game, nobody would ever have to economize anything, ever, Kane would somehow not have aged at all in 15 years, you'd sometimes have to play as a class of units that basically just repairs stuff, and the lame single player story mode includes YOU (the player) having a GIRLFRIEND, well, then I reckon Romulus would have just dropped that blood-soaked rock and sauntered off, disinterested. This I sadly do, too. This game sucks. Expand
  46. ColinD
    Apr 6, 2010
    1
    Alright, let's start from the beginning. Every single concept in this game from the units and graphics down to the HUD display on this game are just a series of asbolute atrocities. For starters, the graphics and unit models in this game are appaling to look at. This game looks like it was designed to be played on Windows 98. Second off, EA has somehow arrived at the conclusion that Alright, let's start from the beginning. Every single concept in this game from the units and graphics down to the HUD display on this game are just a series of asbolute atrocities. For starters, the graphics and unit models in this game are appaling to look at. This game looks like it was designed to be played on Windows 98. Second off, EA has somehow arrived at the conclusion that C&C fans are tired of mining resources, micromanaging, base building, and overall just having fun while playing a game. EA blatantly tries to steal the Dawn of War II playstyle (1 building that produces units) and then bungles that by forgetting one of the key components that every RTS should contain, resource management. There is 0 resource gathering. None. Zippo. You and your opponent just take turns spamming out as many units as you can (about 10 on the field at a time, maximum) and then just walk them over to the enemy base and let them shoot poorly animated projectiles until they die. More importantly, the Nod and GDI tech trees are almost identical. The only real difference in the two sides is the unit colors, because almost every vehicle or soldier on one side has a perfectly corresponding counterpart on the other. Words cannot describe what an atrocity this game is. The live acting cut scenes (every true C&C fan has been wetting their pants watching the trailers with Kane ever since this game's launch date was announced) are pretty much the only thing that return unscathed. The bottom line I'm trying to make here is that this game is bad. Not redeemable, not fawed, not a "game with potential limited by some design errors", just B-A-D. Anyone who tells you otherwise is not a fan of RTS games and should be shot for suggesting this abortion of a title to you. All of this is not even taking into account the fact that the game has EA's classic paranoid DRM policy that requires you to be online while you play the game. That's right, if you don't have an internet connection, you aren't playing this game. Period. Anyone remember how well that worked out for Mercenaries 2, another title EA managed to crap all over with their anti pirating ideas? If this game was offered to me for half the price I would still turn it down. Anyone who supports what EA has done to this franchise is delusional, and more importantly, part of the problem that allows games like this to be created. Expand
  47. BrettP.
    Mar 19, 2010
    1
    The all time worst game I have ever played, this has nothing to do with my love of the C&C series and how this title bastardized it. Overall from a just a gameplay perspective this product fails on every level, it feels like no talent at all was involved with the development of this game. EA if you want to become a contender again, start hiring some real talent and get some testers who The all time worst game I have ever played, this has nothing to do with my love of the C&C series and how this title bastardized it. Overall from a just a gameplay perspective this product fails on every level, it feels like no talent at all was involved with the development of this game. EA if you want to become a contender again, start hiring some real talent and get some testers who know what the hell they are doing, this should of never left the development stage, and quite frankly I would be very embarrassed if I had any involvement with this game. Expand
  48. AndrewH.
    Mar 23, 2010
    1
    It is astounding that a sequel can have worse graphics, worse animation, worse visual interface and worse gameplay mechanic. Tiberian Twilight feels like and looks like a game made 3 years before Tiberium Wars. The new gameplay mechanic becomes increasingly tedious and unsatisfying, it just screams "dumbed down". Also I don't understand the awful visual baggage of green outlying of It is astounding that a sequel can have worse graphics, worse animation, worse visual interface and worse gameplay mechanic. Tiberian Twilight feels like and looks like a game made 3 years before Tiberium Wars. The new gameplay mechanic becomes increasingly tedious and unsatisfying, it just screams "dumbed down". Also I don't understand the awful visual baggage of green outlying of selected units, it makes the entire game even look uglier. Tiberian Twilight fails at the basic level of lacking high production values, and it tops it of with failed gameplay mechanic. A truly bizarre sequel. Expand
  49. SeanW.
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    I'll start this review off with a delve into the story of the game. For me, the story of the C&C (Tiberian Universe) has been one of the more involving and high draw factors for the series. Given that the acting tends to be on the soap opera side of the spectrum it would take a significant amount of effort from the developers to actually make me want to skip the cut scenes. Enter I'll start this review off with a delve into the story of the game. For me, the story of the C&C (Tiberian Universe) has been one of the more involving and high draw factors for the series. Given that the acting tends to be on the soap opera side of the spectrum it would take a significant amount of effort from the developers to actually make me want to skip the cut scenes. Enter Command And Conquer 4, stage left. In the previous title(s) C&C3 (and the expansion Kane's Wrath) the story arc builds towards a climax hinted at coming into it's full glory in the next (read: this) title. To be honest, NONE of the back story in the previous title(s) has ANYTHING to do with this game. At all. Where they could have picked up an actually interesting plot line and fleshed it out, building on and improving where it was leading towards, all that was accomplished was what seems like an afterthought to an already afterthought game. To say that this title makes the characters from the previous EA C&C amazingly enthralling and exciting is just an example of how horribly bad the writers did on this title. They dump you into the middle of a series of events that are NEVER EXPLAINED, offer you questions that shouldn't have even been introduced in the first place, and COMPLETELY REMOVE any tie-in to the previous title. This game was marketed, presented, and wrapped with a single message given to us, the gamers and loyal fans of the series: This is the endgame for the Tiberian story line. We did not need much in terms of story. Nor did we demand anything but at least meeting the bar set by the last title in the series RELEASED BY EA GAMES. This game is not a Command And Conquer title as I view them, and I can not rate it above a 0 for the absolute failure on EA's part to even remotely represent the spirit of the franchise. Come on EA. Expand
  50. MortM
    Mar 20, 2010
    2
    This game has NOTHING to do with C&C. It would be a halfway decent game if it cost 10
  51. KieronS
    Mar 25, 2010
    0
    I was a beta tester for this game, before the preorder's and open beta... I got in because I was one of the people who chose the subtitle. Well let me now state that my favorite part of this game IS the subtitle, as there is not much else to really like. C&C4 is a glorified capture the flag and does nothing for anyone who actually liked C&C to begin with. I played C&C from the start, I was a beta tester for this game, before the preorder's and open beta... I got in because I was one of the people who chose the subtitle. Well let me now state that my favorite part of this game IS the subtitle, as there is not much else to really like. C&C4 is a glorified capture the flag and does nothing for anyone who actually liked C&C to begin with. I played C&C from the start, and I say now with total certainty that this is no way to end it.This game is a horrible, shallow attempt at cloning concepts popular from DOW2 and similar titles. I will never legally purchase this game, not even if it was in the $5 bargin bin. I will always beleive the way C&C should have ended is with a time travel experiment to stop the tiberium in the first place, and thus stopping the scrin AND forming the Red Alert Universe. Which was the orignal ending planned. It is a shame that EA feels like it had to ruin such an awesome series with such a poorly done attempt to gain the users of DOW2. Expand
  52. CarlR
    Mar 26, 2010
    3
    I bought this game knowing the bad reviews, but though i would have fun with the multilayer. Man was I wrong. There is not alot good to say about this game. The single player is boring. The multiplayer is just as boring. It boils down to pumping out a bunch of units and moving them to a node. They die, and you repeat. No strategy, no tiberium, no bases, no fun. Whatever you do, do not buy I bought this game knowing the bad reviews, but though i would have fun with the multilayer. Man was I wrong. There is not alot good to say about this game. The single player is boring. The multiplayer is just as boring. It boils down to pumping out a bunch of units and moving them to a node. They die, and you repeat. No strategy, no tiberium, no bases, no fun. Whatever you do, do not buy this game. I just lost 50 bucks and will never get it back. Expand
  53. BriceD
    Mar 28, 2010
    1
    Wow, just wow. I got into the hype on C&C4 watching the game trailers. I sat there day after day watching the website count down to the release. I had the game preordered the minute I could apply on line. RTS is my favorite gaming genre and I have played every C&C title since the original. Ever since EA took over the franchise from Westwood studios, all the games in this series have been Wow, just wow. I got into the hype on C&C4 watching the game trailers. I sat there day after day watching the website count down to the release. I had the game preordered the minute I could apply on line. RTS is my favorite gaming genre and I have played every C&C title since the original. Ever since EA took over the franchise from Westwood studios, all the games in this series have been lacking. Each ones seems to miss the original elements that made these RTS, C&C, C&C:Red Alert, different from the others. Generals was terrible, RA3 and C&C3 seemed like EA hit copy + paste and re-skinned the units. Westwood took time on their games. Each one was new in multiple ways, from gameplay to graphics, story, etc. Even though the games changed they held the core values of what it was to be an RTS in the style that Westwood created. EA makes sports games, they copy + paste all of their work. Why they tried to make an RTS is beyond me. They lack the talent and technical skills to pull it off successfully. What's done is done, it's a terrible game and we are left with nothing new to play. I just hope the "developers" of this monstrosity realize that they failed and their game really, really "sucks". Expand
  54. JoshW
    Mar 20, 2010
    2
    A shamelessly exploitative game, EA have made no effort to accommodate for what was already a significant fan-base, it wouldn't surprise me if the direction they've taken C&C4 succeeds in alienating more people than it attracts. I can understand that the format was getting old (even though I personally still enjoyed it) and that some went so far as to consider it A shamelessly exploitative game, EA have made no effort to accommodate for what was already a significant fan-base, it wouldn't surprise me if the direction they've taken C&C4 succeeds in alienating more people than it attracts. I can understand that the format was getting old (even though I personally still enjoyed it) and that some went so far as to consider it 'dated' - I could even understand it if they had changed the 'old' format in a way which was original and corresponded with the rest of the series. However, the way in which they have so blatantly ripped off Dawn of War and other RTS 'rivals' is unbelievable. I don't even really think that those sort of games are rivals, most of the people I know into strategy games play both, and for different reasons! To make things worse, the only redeeming features that this game actually has are the ones robbed from these other games, which leaves not much to praise in C&C4. I'm sorry Ea, but you've murdered and raped (in that order) a wonderful game. Be ashamed of yourselves. Expand
  55. MawC
    Apr 10, 2010
    0
    This doest even deserve a score.. if possible i'd give it a -10 for alienating almost every hardcore C & C fan, EA has gone too far regarding "change" in games Like all the other fans out there i feel like this is a terrible Dawn of War ripoff and doesnt even deserve the name " Command and Conquer " No basebuilding, No micromanaging, graphics ETC ETC i can go on for ages about what This doest even deserve a score.. if possible i'd give it a -10 for alienating almost every hardcore C & C fan, EA has gone too far regarding "change" in games Like all the other fans out there i feel like this is a terrible Dawn of War ripoff and doesnt even deserve the name " Command and Conquer " No basebuilding, No micromanaging, graphics ETC ETC i can go on for ages about what went wrong the Second EA took over the franchise and Stabbed the hard working crew of westwood in the back, i wouldnt even get this game if it was FREE ! Yes, u heard me ! Its a spawn of evil That EA " The Hit & Miss Crew " Gave birth to whilst snorting tiberium. They should have asked the dedicated gamers about their opinions about this, id say that this is even worse than Infinity Ward's Stab in the back with the "Consoleported Golden turd" I'm hurt and i wont ever support any of EA's oncoming titles AGAIN ! Expand
  56. MikeM
    Mar 17, 2010
    0
    This game is NOT command and conquer. When westwood created the original back in 1995, they revolutionised RTS. They layed the base core of what all RTS games needed. Tiberiun sun expanded on this, and EA again expanded further, whislt also angering its community with shoddy balancing and too many changes of what was considered the norm. Having to seemingly not listen to the community, This game is NOT command and conquer. When westwood created the original back in 1995, they revolutionised RTS. They layed the base core of what all RTS games needed. Tiberiun sun expanded on this, and EA again expanded further, whislt also angering its community with shoddy balancing and too many changes of what was considered the norm. Having to seemingly not listen to the community, despite saying they have, they then release Kanes Wrath, which was essentially, what C&C should have been in terms of gameplay. Having once again displeased the community again with lack of patches and securom causing ALOT of system formats due to major issues with it, they now release C&C 4, which is nothing like the previous games. Just because the game references tiberium and uses it in a majorly poor way, has Kane, and has old units (that look totally different), does not make a game deserve the Command and Conquer title. This game should have been scrapped at the start and make how the people wanted it. EA, a company so narrow minded it seems, that they only care about the money, not what the people actually want. I do feel sorry for Joe Kucan who is basically the star of the whole series being sent out in such a poor, poor way. Expand
  57. ShaneF
    Mar 17, 2010
    0
    I've played every C&C game ever made and was brought into the RTS world by Command & Conquer on the Sega and, as most others probably were, was glad beyond believe that the fourth and final installment in the long lasting Tiberium series was coming, but when I finally got the game... well simply enough this isn't C&C, It's a horrid waste of money and time with practically I've played every C&C game ever made and was brought into the RTS world by Command & Conquer on the Sega and, as most others probably were, was glad beyond believe that the fourth and final installment in the long lasting Tiberium series was coming, but when I finally got the game... well simply enough this isn't C&C, It's a horrid waste of money and time with practically nothing in common with past installments and answers almost none of the questions we were told it would answer and as such this "Epic conclusion of the Tiberium saga" as EA calls it, doesn't deserve to be honored with the title of C&C 4. Expand
  58. Rob
    Mar 19, 2010
    2
    Gave this a 2 because of the colours Seriously, if your a C&C fanboy and loves to gather resources and enjoy watching your ranks of buzzers/ mammoth tanks / NOD troopers smash the opposition, DONT BUY THIS 50 points to spend on units, each unit is average 4 points. Gain EXP just so you can get the next unit even in a LAN environment, just not worth it. Why should i be punished for buying Gave this a 2 because of the colours Seriously, if your a C&C fanboy and loves to gather resources and enjoy watching your ranks of buzzers/ mammoth tanks / NOD troopers smash the opposition, DONT BUY THIS 50 points to spend on units, each unit is average 4 points. Gain EXP just so you can get the next unit even in a LAN environment, just not worth it. Why should i be punished for buying a game? this is not a RPG its an RTS. Expand
  59. an
    Mar 20, 2010
    0
    This game is horrible. The requirement to connect to the internet is a worthless requirement, that prevents this game from being played on the go. Also the story line has a predictable ending. We have known for almost a decade that Kane was going to ascend. EA had Kane ascend, but they didn't give a view of the alien world. And in the game play the Scrin are non-existent. We had This game is horrible. The requirement to connect to the internet is a worthless requirement, that prevents this game from being played on the go. Also the story line has a predictable ending. We have known for almost a decade that Kane was going to ascend. EA had Kane ascend, but they didn't give a view of the alien world. And in the game play the Scrin are non-existent. We had heard rumors that the Scrin would reappear and attack earth again, but of course EA decided not to include this. Expand
  60. LancS.
    Mar 21, 2010
    0
    Horrible bastardisation of the old beloved franchise, they ripped out everything good and dear from the older C&C games and just added horrible gameplay mixed with almost no base building and constant aggrevating combat. Even as an RTS it literally forces you to grind for hours for you to get the units you want, twice, as NOD and GDI have seperate experience bars. Terrible, Terrible, Terrible.
  61. C&C1fan
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    WOW way to kill C&C EA! Are you too ***** cheap to have a collectors edition and color manual... maybe a paper cover for the DVD case. The game-play is terrible and not a part of the RTS genre. Its more of a sub-play mode that focus on tactics and small groups of units. It's ALWAYS fast paste with simple tactics and no real strategy. The combat looks like toy cars fighting one WOW way to kill C&C EA! Are you too ***** cheap to have a collectors edition and color manual... maybe a paper cover for the DVD case. The game-play is terrible and not a part of the RTS genre. Its more of a sub-play mode that focus on tactics and small groups of units. It's ALWAYS fast paste with simple tactics and no real strategy. The combat looks like toy cars fighting one another. A lot of the units feel the same, they have no individual kick. What happened to tiberium covering the world, why is tiberium chunks collected from platforms? EA took ideas from other games with no understanding as to how they work within their game mechanics and created this crap of game with C&C art. If I where to compare this game play as more like a Demigods game to supreme commander. The Missions are weak because of a lack of good story telling, EA really... 30 sec mission and character introductions? The leveling system is stupid for single player, missions are not designed around new abilities gained by the player because you can unlock units from multi-player and use them in any mission. Cant EA design missions that will teach us how to use each base type and unit formation? Both the managers and designers should be fired for this disgrace of a game! Maybe then they'll have some time to play a real RTS like Star Craft 2. I wish Blizzard had the IP for C&C. They would had talent and business sense to make a great game that sells because its great. NOT WORTH BUYING, I hope all the good designers in EA wont support this poor equal brand anymore and leave Electronic Junk!!! and let the manager and share holders who call the shots, drowning in this sinking ship. Stop buying and destroying good IP! Expand
  62. aidenz
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    even though i thought this game was being treated too harshly by the people giving it very low scores i have to agree with everything they say. as far as the game goes the new gameplay could have been an interesting experience (it's not an awefull concept) but the execution just isn't right it doesn't feel like a c&c game. de video's are horrible (even though before even though i thought this game was being treated too harshly by the people giving it very low scores i have to agree with everything they say. as far as the game goes the new gameplay could have been an interesting experience (it's not an awefull concept) but the execution just isn't right it doesn't feel like a c&c game. de video's are horrible (even though before they weren't the best ) i feel myself cringing at the horrible acting. as for the persistent internet connection just screws up the game for me because my internet connection just times out every once in a while and i lose all of the stuf i just worked my butt of to get. it's just not worth the money. Expand
  63. RyanS
    Mar 26, 2010
    0
    This game is Command and Conquer by name only and should be AVOIDED like the plague by anybody looking to buy a typical Command and Conquer game. EA took a mish-mash of styles from other games, bundled them all into this game (poorly) and slapped the Command and Conquer badge on it. In the process losing the entire formula that makes a typical C&C game. * Want base building? - You're This game is Command and Conquer by name only and should be AVOIDED like the plague by anybody looking to buy a typical Command and Conquer game. EA took a mish-mash of styles from other games, bundled them all into this game (poorly) and slapped the Command and Conquer badge on it. In the process losing the entire formula that makes a typical C&C game. * Want base building? - You're not finding it here! * Want resource harvesting? - Again, no such luck. * Want to be treated like a loyal customer rather than a potential pirate? - Nope, flat out of luck. The game requires that you log into EA's servers before it lets you even play single player. EA have basically used and abused the C&C brand to try and push their attempt at something new. The end result, a failure of a game that lets down the C&C fans, and isn't strong enough to stand on it's own right. Very disappointing for the final game in the franchise. Expand
  64. DrewHero
    Apr 13, 2010
    1
    Though the game does get rid of fighting for ore/tibirum, i think it is a major setback for C&C. A lot of the strategy of the game is taken away when you can only build no more then 20 units, and don't have to worry about resources. Also, the stupid crawler/mcvs are overpowered and add a lot of pointless BS requirements to missions. I actually think the single player is broken Though the game does get rid of fighting for ore/tibirum, i think it is a major setback for C&C. A lot of the strategy of the game is taken away when you can only build no more then 20 units, and don't have to worry about resources. Also, the stupid crawler/mcvs are overpowered and add a lot of pointless BS requirements to missions. I actually think the single player is broken becuase the missions really only have 1-2 ways of completing them successful, not multiple paths to victory like in old C&C games. In addition, taking away the ability to build both offensive units, defensive units, support units and buildings at the same time make the actual planning and strategy of the game on a super low level. This game is a serious disappointment, I want Westwood studios back. Expand
  65. ShaneJ.
    Mar 16, 2010
    1
    Was not at all worth the money, and it is not at all deserving of the score it received. Critics, your opinions suck and are more often than not, wrong. I can't even bloody zoom in or out in this game, you can't build bases, you cant send your individual units into cover, you send an army straight at an enemy and sit there for a bit just watching them shoot eachother... The most Was not at all worth the money, and it is not at all deserving of the score it received. Critics, your opinions suck and are more often than not, wrong. I can't even bloody zoom in or out in this game, you can't build bases, you cant send your individual units into cover, you send an army straight at an enemy and sit there for a bit just watching them shoot eachother... The most notable mess-up I noticed was at the very beginning, after I started thinking "This kinda sucks, when does base building and army massing and good graphics come in?"; Escorting Kane to wherever-it-was and being faced with three Obelisks of Light and thinking "I only have nine tanks... what the hell am I going to do?". Not only did I make it, I didn't lose a single bloody tank, whereas in the others, a single Obelisk is able to batter an army around. WHY EA didn't feel the need to Beta test this game to see how people would react is beyond me. It's a simple bloody thing to show someone something and ask for their opinion. At the very least they could have asked the makers of Dawn of War 2 for a bloody hint since they tried fairly hard to have the same form of gameplay. Worst waste of $50.00, and I mourn the loss of what was supposed to be an epic games triumphant conclusion, but hey, at least EA got their money, why should they care? Expand
  66. MikeB
    Mar 16, 2010
    0
    I am shocked at how bad this is. its unreal, im completely stunned. The GUI is awful, the friend system is archaic. the campaign is so mundane, there is no strategy involved, its just a ground and pound. no base, no structures no planning, just move your crawler around spamming unit production and win, its impossible to lose unless you just straight out ignore the prompts. the Co-Op was I am shocked at how bad this is. its unreal, im completely stunned. The GUI is awful, the friend system is archaic. the campaign is so mundane, there is no strategy involved, its just a ground and pound. no base, no structures no planning, just move your crawler around spamming unit production and win, its impossible to lose unless you just straight out ignore the prompts. the Co-Op was pointless, there is no point to team work, this has to be the worst CnC game ever. i really really am sad i loved the others and i wish i could have my money back. I hate you EA games, your the devil. Expand
  67. Jul 21, 2012
    3
    The best I can say about Command and Conquer 4 is at least it didn't kick my dog, it never started on fire, and at no point did it attempt a hostile takeover of my employer's business.
  68. Ndi
    Jun 23, 2013
    1
    If you are going to slap C&C badge on a game, you'd better have the basics.

    What happened was obvious. They ran out of ideas for the franchise and decided to cash in on 20 years of history for 5 more dollars.

    Remember Dawn of War versus Dawn of War 2? Well, that, except this has no better graphics. They thought that if Relic had so much success, they wait.
  69. SethF.
    Apr 20, 2010
    4
    I can't say it's the worst game I've played. The multilayer is an enjoyable factor, but could be tweaked to make it better. Besides the fact that the whole thing is different, I say it's an OK game. Nothing I would be willing to jump out and pay $50 for. I would buy it at the max of $20. Even then I wouldn't be all over it. I was really happy when I got into the I can't say it's the worst game I've played. The multilayer is an enjoyable factor, but could be tweaked to make it better. Besides the fact that the whole thing is different, I say it's an OK game. Nothing I would be willing to jump out and pay $50 for. I would buy it at the max of $20. Even then I wouldn't be all over it. I was really happy when I got into the beta, and regretted coming out of it. I recommend you all wait 'til StarCraft 2 comes out. Expand
  70. PsiRedEye22
    Mar 20, 2010
    1
    Everybody else pretty much summed it up, but this is seriously the only time I've ever played a game and thought to myself "wow, I really need to post about this on metacritic just so people don't get suckered into this assfest. If you read nothing else at all about C&C 4, read this: My first thought going in was "It's C&C, how can it be THAT bad? The peer reviews must be Everybody else pretty much summed it up, but this is seriously the only time I've ever played a game and thought to myself "wow, I really need to post about this on metacritic just so people don't get suckered into this assfest. If you read nothing else at all about C&C 4, read this: My first thought going in was "It's C&C, how can it be THAT bad? The peer reviews must be stupid"...but, they are absolutely right. This game is not worth anything above 10 dollars. Do. Not. Buy. It. Expand
  71. johns
    Apr 22, 2010
    0
    This is not a command and conquer style rts game.I enjoyed c&c 3 and all the other c&c games so why does this look like a completely different game its supposed to be the final part in the tiberium series so why does it look and play so different.i wish id had the oportunity to play the free beta then i would not have wasted my money on this trash.i have always been loyal to c&c and i This is not a command and conquer style rts game.I enjoyed c&c 3 and all the other c&c games so why does this look like a completely different game its supposed to be the final part in the tiberium series so why does it look and play so different.i wish id had the oportunity to play the free beta then i would not have wasted my money on this trash.i have always been loyal to c&c and i have bought every game from the very beginning but i feel so let down........Electronic Arts please give me my money back. Expand
  72. Nov 19, 2013
    1
    This game is just plain bad. They did not need to change the ENTIRE F**KING GAME! If they had introduced new units, and made the tech tree bigger then told the story in a similar fashion to C&C 3: Tiberian Wars, then it would have maybe been a great finish to a great series but the fact they took away the point of C&C which was base building, recourse gathering and tactical moments ofThis game is just plain bad. They did not need to change the ENTIRE F**KING GAME! If they had introduced new units, and made the tech tree bigger then told the story in a similar fashion to C&C 3: Tiberian Wars, then it would have maybe been a great finish to a great series but the fact they took away the point of C&C which was base building, recourse gathering and tactical moments of troops, and replaced it with 'please move these troops here.......well done, now move here'.
    DESTROYED THE GAME ENTIRELY!
    Expand
  73. Alex
    Mar 22, 2010
    1
    Not entirely sure what the game designers were thinking when they decided to do away with tiberium, especially when the entire series is based around tiberium crystals and base-building as is hinted at in all the titles of the series. It's almost a given that the people who made this game lack the talent, skill and imagination of the old Westwood Studios. Unfortunately the team who Not entirely sure what the game designers were thinking when they decided to do away with tiberium, especially when the entire series is based around tiberium crystals and base-building as is hinted at in all the titles of the series. It's almost a given that the people who made this game lack the talent, skill and imagination of the old Westwood Studios. Unfortunately the team who made this game will go onto make further games potentially ruining another landmark RTS. The game designers especially should be prevented from writing any further games yet this won't happen and they themselves will carry on believing that they're good at their job. Not entirely sure why the mainstream reviewers have rated it so highly I think it may be because the previous titles held so much acclaim. Expand
  74. JoeG
    Apr 17, 2010
    1
    This game is absolutely rubbish - Very poor game play, rubbish graphics, looks and feels like a kindergarten version of the C&C games. Very sorry I bough it, I have bought every one of the C&C and Red Alert games since 1995 but I will not be buying any more of this family of games. Not what I expected from EA!!!
  75. LouisD.
    Apr 18, 2010
    2
    Far too small scale to be considered a real-time strategy game, this game makes a compelling case for a new genre, "Real-Time Tactical". If you are happy deploying no more than twelve vehicles at a time, then this is the game for you. The story line is weak and leaves alot to be desired, but the options given to the player to choose their future is very reminiscent of the early C&C Far too small scale to be considered a real-time strategy game, this game makes a compelling case for a new genre, "Real-Time Tactical". If you are happy deploying no more than twelve vehicles at a time, then this is the game for you. The story line is weak and leaves alot to be desired, but the options given to the player to choose their future is very reminiscent of the early C&C titles. The handful of excellent features (such as the arsenal tab before every mission) are far outweighed by the tiny scope of the battles, the poor balance for the units, and the silly limitations placed upon the player by both command points and "crawlers". It is a sad end to the C&C series. Expand
  76. GeorgeL
    Mar 17, 2010
    2
    Worst RTS i've ever played, no real strategy as your simply have to keep up or try to overwhelm your opponent by pumping out units faster. no base defense to speak of, extremely boring, sad end for one of my favorite franchises. utter failure.
  77. JamesB
    Mar 17, 2010
    1
    It is not C&C in any way whatsoever. In fact it is a game aimed at 8 year olds who do not like losing as you cannot lose.. I hate EA and am going to boycott all their games due to their lack of interest (respect) in the people who played and loved the original C&C game.
  78. jorgec
    Mar 18, 2010
    2
    This is one of those games where i wish i had never spent my money on. wasted 49 dollars on a game that had a bad story line, bad game play system (onless your a fan of it which im not) and a horible ending. it lacked the excitement and rush that you felt when you played the game. the log on system is also an issue, be expecting proplems if the server is down. graphic wise it was nice This is one of those games where i wish i had never spent my money on. wasted 49 dollars on a game that had a bad story line, bad game play system (onless your a fan of it which im not) and a horible ending. it lacked the excitement and rush that you felt when you played the game. the log on system is also an issue, be expecting proplems if the server is down. graphic wise it was nice some items but nothing amazing, in fact some things didnt make sence like the nukes looked like small explosions instead of BIG BRIGHT explosions ill tell you this, i dont know what got into the people who made this game but it was just FINE as it was before this change. Im a fan of the c&c games and this is just a sad thing to see. Expand
  79. JoshW
    Mar 19, 2010
    1
    A shamelessly exploitative game, EA have made no effort to accommodate for what was already a significant fan-base, it wouldn't surprise me if the direction they've taken C&C4 succeeds in alienating more people than it attracts. I can understand that the format was getting old (even though I personally still enjoyed it) and that some went so far as to consider it A shamelessly exploitative game, EA have made no effort to accommodate for what was already a significant fan-base, it wouldn't surprise me if the direction they've taken C&C4 succeeds in alienating more people than it attracts. I can understand that the format was getting old (even though I personally still enjoyed it) and that some went so far as to consider it 'dated' - I could even understand it if they had changed the 'old' format in a way which was original and corresponded with the rest of the series. However, the way in which they have so blatantly ripped off Dawn of War and other RTS 'rivals' is unbelievable. I don't even really think that those sort of games are rivals, most of the people I know into strategy games play both, and for different reasons! To make things worse, the only redeeming features that this game actually has are the ones robbed from these other games, which leaves not much to praise in C&C4. I'm sorry Ea, but you've murdered and raped (in that order) a wonderful game. Be ashamed of yourselves. Expand
  80. JonathanT
    Mar 21, 2010
    2
    EA ... Seriously? The game has been paired down so badly, it's no longer fun. C&C 3's gameplay had refinement and attention to detail and effort. This feels like Red Alert 3, rubbish. A small list of problems: - Animations *The Walker animations (you spin on the spot? but yet the mastedon correctly walks around) *Oversized and ugly air planes.... *Fat units. - The pacing of the EA ... Seriously? The game has been paired down so badly, it's no longer fun. C&C 3's gameplay had refinement and attention to detail and effort. This feels like Red Alert 3, rubbish. A small list of problems: - Animations *The Walker animations (you spin on the spot? but yet the mastedon correctly walks around) *Oversized and ugly air planes.... *Fat units. - The pacing of the combat feels too rushed..... everything fires at a thousand miles an hour or too slowly I've a long time fan of the C&C series, but this feels like it was made for small kids, the only saving grace is at least the acting and the cut scenes are better. Please get the management and original team who made C&C 3 back and sort this game out with a patch. Expand
  81. TomasS
    Mar 20, 2010
    2
    The game as a RTS is a terrible game, it requires very little strategy to play. I invested about 5 or 6 hours into playing this game and honestly want my money back. The game is nothing a C&C game should be, As a new franchise it could be quite respectable. However, the game is not a new franchise, it was advertised as a C&C4 game and it failed miserably. The game has no economy, very The game as a RTS is a terrible game, it requires very little strategy to play. I invested about 5 or 6 hours into playing this game and honestly want my money back. The game is nothing a C&C game should be, As a new franchise it could be quite respectable. However, the game is not a new franchise, it was advertised as a C&C4 game and it failed miserably. The game has no economy, very simplistic strategy and no lasting consequences to poor decisions. The extent of the strategy in this game is how fast can you change your queue of units to build the unit that counters the units used to counter your units. Since there is no cost for building units, there is no value on any unit you build. The game is a C&C game, and therefore there are certain elements people expect from the game, out of which non are present. The storyline is also a huge dissapointment, the missions are bland and simple and the storyline is just terrible. Kane has no evil left in him pretty much, he has just gone soft with age i guess. Expand
  82. JeremyP
    Mar 20, 2010
    1
    This is the worst CNC I have ever played. The only reason I'm giving it a 1 is because the graphics look good. This new game mode of capturing and holding would be great if it were just an option, but for an entire game based on this, it's awful. I can't believe I wasted my money buying this! I'm glad I only payed half price. I wish I could have gotten the beta to This is the worst CNC I have ever played. The only reason I'm giving it a 1 is because the graphics look good. This new game mode of capturing and holding would be great if it were just an option, but for an entire game based on this, it's awful. I can't believe I wasted my money buying this! I'm glad I only payed half price. I wish I could have gotten the beta to connect to someone so I wouldn't have bothered buying it. This isn't CNC, it's some cheap knock off and I can't believe they would end the CNC series this way, should have stopped at CNC3. Expand
  83. rp
    Mar 22, 2010
    1
    Well, after 3 crashes it finally loaded and ran. This is a Command & Conquer game??????? You can call this C&C 4 if you want but it looks more like a game that should be on the $9.99 bargain rack at Wal-Mart. I ignored my first rule on buying PC games; never buy untill reading the reviews from users. That was a mistake and now I'm out $50. HEY EA, if it aint broke don't fix it. Well, after 3 crashes it finally loaded and ran. This is a Command & Conquer game??????? You can call this C&C 4 if you want but it looks more like a game that should be on the $9.99 bargain rack at Wal-Mart. I ignored my first rule on buying PC games; never buy untill reading the reviews from users. That was a mistake and now I'm out $50. HEY EA, if it aint broke don't fix it. Moving a hulking unit around to puke out a very limited number of units is not an RTS game. What were you thinking, we need money but we don't want to spend any to get it? How about a refund or give me a game worth $50. Expand
  84. JonathanM
    Mar 17, 2010
    5
    I played the Beta and was greatly disappointed with the path they have taken. Like they tried to breed Ground Control and Dawn of War together and failed. I will only be getting it once it is really cheap to play the SP. Rating it 5 because it still good in some peoples' eyes but being a fan of the series as a whole... made me cry.
  85. NolanS
    Mar 19, 2010
    2
    Nothing like what the c&c should be...its quite pathetic how ea just manages to screw up one game after another, they should have ended this game like it was meant to end, fix the problems from the old style, fix the lan, fix the desyncing and just leave wat they had alone and just build on it, not come at it with a completely different design and interface, its a absolute disgrace to the Nothing like what the c&c should be...its quite pathetic how ea just manages to screw up one game after another, they should have ended this game like it was meant to end, fix the problems from the old style, fix the lan, fix the desyncing and just leave wat they had alone and just build on it, not come at it with a completely different design and interface, its a absolute disgrace to the series, it should have been canceled instead of releasing a complete and utter failure. and EA manages to screw up every game they pretty much touch, which screams either new management or new programmers, either way, EA needs to change the way they make and package their games together, because with all the new games coming out, this game, and bad company 2 and a few others, are terrible compared to Cod mwf2 and supcom 2 and starcraft 2. and wat could really be their excuse? low budget? yea right, a company that size with a trilogy that successful, gimme a break, id say i definitly feel cheated out of my money for c&c 4, and it just seems like with ea this happens more and more and more, no money put into the game, and the game still sells for 50 bones, just utter bull crap. Expand
  86. ErikD
    Mar 19, 2010
    0
    I seriously don't know where to start. OK, I'm a die-hard fan of CC. I own every single CC game ever released, even the Red Alert counterparts, and all the expansions. Now, I wish my die-hard self would had died before CC4. Let's start by saying that I have spent triple the amount of time in the in game chat than playing the actual game. Half of that time has been helping I seriously don't know where to start. OK, I'm a die-hard fan of CC. I own every single CC game ever released, even the Red Alert counterparts, and all the expansions. Now, I wish my die-hard self would had died before CC4. Let's start by saying that I have spent triple the amount of time in the in game chat than playing the actual game. Half of that time has been helping the players with problems, be it graphical issues, connection issues, etc. This list goes on and on about issues. Second, the first couple days after release I would hop online every couple hours. I amassed some statistics that I will be compiling into a youtube video. ( I may use this for a Statistic project for a class in college) The first day of release, 89% of all messages into the chatbox were negative comments about the game. That total is the average of 5 different "General Chat" lobbies. Most of which had dozens of negative comments the second I joined. One room I asked who wanted their money back and 11 responded YES I want my money back, remember, that is one room, one incident. EA tried to fix something that wasn't broken. The result, yes, they broke it. They modified the game out of corporate greed thinking that original fans of CC will like and at the same time they could draw in fans of World in Conflict, Dawn of War II, etc. The result, CC fans are absolutely furious, as well as no additional fans being drawn in. Expand
  87. davidh.
    Mar 19, 2010
    1
    EA has trashed the venerable C&C series with this insulting entry, C&C 4. No base-building/resource gathering, A disgusting lack of depth to the single-player campaign,and,last but not least,the inability to even play unless you log-in to EA's servers in the name of protecting against piracy.Well, the fans,and gamers in general should not be forced into paying-the-price for piracy. EA has trashed the venerable C&C series with this insulting entry, C&C 4. No base-building/resource gathering, A disgusting lack of depth to the single-player campaign,and,last but not least,the inability to even play unless you log-in to EA's servers in the name of protecting against piracy.Well, the fans,and gamers in general should not be forced into paying-the-price for piracy. Data-mining in disguise and a slap-in-the-face to gamers. The game gets a 1 for no other reason than it has a "place" in the c&c lineage,even though it is a dishonorable place. Save Your Money. Expand
  88. WillI
    Mar 19, 2010
    0
    Total rubbish. I must say, congratulations EA for destroying the worlds foremost gaming franchise. We knew it would come one day, but never in such a large kick to the face. This game has nothing to do with any other C&C release. The mechanics are a total guess work, with next to no relationship to any other branch of the C&C world. Being a C&C player from release day 1, i await each Total rubbish. I must say, congratulations EA for destroying the worlds foremost gaming franchise. We knew it would come one day, but never in such a large kick to the face. This game has nothing to do with any other C&C release. The mechanics are a total guess work, with next to no relationship to any other branch of the C&C world. Being a C&C player from release day 1, i await each release on the edge of my seat. I am aware that there are different "branches" of C&C, with Red Alert often being the most confusing, but still within it's design scope. This release and "final" chapter to the Tiberium series is just pure vomit. Tiberium Sun is the single best release for the Tiberium range. I bought Tiberium Twilight at 1:37pm AEST on Steam. I deleted it from Steam at 4:44pm AEST. Thank you EA you have destroyed and crippled the worlds most important founding gaming franchise. Signing Off Wimmig_AUS SGL AUSTRALIA C&C FOUNDING MEMBER. Expand
  89. AndrewP.
    Mar 21, 2010
    0
    Solely judging by the gameplay trailers, I Refused to purchase this game. That coupled with my friend's utter lack of satisfaction with the game led me to write this review. Mind you, I was introduced to C&C back around the Red Alert era and I was instantly a fan. It was the, straight up, perfect balance between base building and offensive strategy. Every other game tries to make Solely judging by the gameplay trailers, I Refused to purchase this game. That coupled with my friend's utter lack of satisfaction with the game led me to write this review. Mind you, I was introduced to C&C back around the Red Alert era and I was instantly a fan. It was the, straight up, perfect balance between base building and offensive strategy. Every other game tries to make that one original masterpiece better by adding new things to it but it fails to notice the simplicity in mind when the game was made. If a game has too few components, lacking the basics, it soon becomes the lowest piece of garbage on the market. And if a game has several brilliant concepts and excellent ideas to it but not enough refining, *cough*Stormrise*cough*, then it fails as well. Now, when you take a game that sticks to the standard and tradition style of gameplay that it always had done in the past, a.k.a. unit production, build tabs, researching upgrades, and totally switch it over, you have to understand that there WILL be massive drawbacks. I usually end these on a good note, but just from my short 5 minutes of playing the game I have to say that I hate what EA has done to this franchise. You sorry people have twisted the masterpiece that Westwood held onto for so long and forever destroyed Command & Conquer. I refuse to even say that there ever was a C&C4. It's like what they did to the Alien series. Alien 3 was the final movie. It was to be a trilogy. Then some director says, 'Hey, what would happen if we did this...' and makes some mock up piece of crap movie that, while has some decent moments, shouldn't have ever been made. In conclusion, C&C4 has proven to be the worst example of what EA can truly do to a game. Battle for Middle Earth was fantastic and the second was even better. Then they came out with C&C3 and I was enthralled. However, this game was as much of a put down to me as Ubisoft's Dark Messiah: Might and Magic and SEGA's Stormrise. EA has stooped to a level lower than I can describe. I will always judge EA's games as the worst thing and come to expect the worst out of them. This is unforgivable, as this series is more popular than all of Blizzard's games combined. Never have I wanted to see Westwood back in business more. Expand
  90. Kungfu196
    Mar 21, 2010
    2
    Again, EA prooved us that their influences on magnifiscent games like C & C and others is horrible, good way to destroy the series EA, awsome director and team, congradulation! Its too much expensive, maybe 9.99 would have been a bit too much, but not 49.99. The game is dangerous for those who got eyes problems, the scenario is horrible, the EA support contact is less than pathetic and Again, EA prooved us that their influences on magnifiscent games like C & C and others is horrible, good way to destroy the series EA, awsome director and team, congradulation! Its too much expensive, maybe 9.99 would have been a bit too much, but not 49.99. The game is dangerous for those who got eyes problems, the scenario is horrible, the EA support contact is less than pathetic and the servers are simply not servers... Again, congradulation to EA and their team. Expand
  91. ArmandoG.
    Mar 21, 2010
    2
    Congratulations EA on CnC's Big finale, a total Letdown. I can't believe that you ended a great franchise with a such boring story and the gameplay totally sucks, its like a copy of company of heroes and Dawn of War II. Sure the animations are awesome, but other than that everything is a complete disappointment. I am a CnC Fan and seeing this game makes me really sad to know Congratulations EA on CnC's Big finale, a total Letdown. I can't believe that you ended a great franchise with a such boring story and the gameplay totally sucks, its like a copy of company of heroes and Dawn of War II. Sure the animations are awesome, but other than that everything is a complete disappointment. I am a CnC Fan and seeing this game makes me really sad to know that a great franchise had a really bad ending. It's just Disappointing. Expand
  92. JasonK.
    Mar 22, 2010
    1
    This was Command and Conquer? Felt like I was playing some other game the entire time. So I have a unit collect these... Crystals to upgrade my units? No Tiberium to harvest? Where did it all go? Thought the world was nearly un-inhabitable with all of it. The Story-Line needed a LOT of work. It was like a 6year old wrote a short story and there it was. The combat system needs work. And This was Command and Conquer? Felt like I was playing some other game the entire time. So I have a unit collect these... Crystals to upgrade my units? No Tiberium to harvest? Where did it all go? Thought the world was nearly un-inhabitable with all of it. The Story-Line needed a LOT of work. It was like a 6year old wrote a short story and there it was. The combat system needs work. And what was this idea of a Command Point system? I can understand a unit cap, but what? My army is small man! Where is the Command in that? Moveable MCV? Ok, I can understand in Skirmish but.. Really? Just move it anywhere i want? Deploy zones? What am I playing, A board game? Must start here! Sigh. I expect a LOT more out of the final game for the Tiberium Series. A LOT more. This was very weak. Wish I could take my game back but all I would get is in-store credit for a used game that is already registered. Sorry EA, but your Fail Truck has arrived. Replay all the C&C Games that involved Tiberium and you will see all that you Failed in. Expand
  93. MarcusA
    Mar 23, 2010
    0
    Managed to fail at everything the previous games were loved for. Besides being a mediocre looking game, it's mechanics are mostly disappointing. Looks like someone made a bad game, then slapped C&C on the front cover so that it would sell. Never have I felt as cheated off my money as I feel now. Ruined what should have been great. This is Command and Conquer in nothing but name.
  94. LH
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    This game is terrible, no base building, poor graphics and boring gameplay. Such a shame as it ruined the end of the series. Do not waste your money, i wouldn't even waste bandwidth downloading a pirate of this.. I played the first few linear campaign maps, then a few skirmishes, felt so cheated that i returned the game for a refund, Ai seem to have no intelligence at all, that with This game is terrible, no base building, poor graphics and boring gameplay. Such a shame as it ruined the end of the series. Do not waste your money, i wouldn't even waste bandwidth downloading a pirate of this.. I played the first few linear campaign maps, then a few skirmishes, felt so cheated that i returned the game for a refund, Ai seem to have no intelligence at all, that with additional to numerous bugs makes this EA's worst game to date. Expand
  95. AaronC.
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    Command and... Failure? The last three C&C games I played, all involved you, GDI or NOD, building your little base, and spamming out units to delightfully smash against each other until eventually you reached their base, destroyed it, and started another game. Oh, and you had to harvest these strange mutagenic crystals called tiberium for monies beacuse the countries could do cool things Command and... Failure? The last three C&C games I played, all involved you, GDI or NOD, building your little base, and spamming out units to delightfully smash against each other until eventually you reached their base, destroyed it, and started another game. Oh, and you had to harvest these strange mutagenic crystals called tiberium for monies beacuse the countries could do cool things with them. It worked right? C&C 4 didn't think so. A complete changeup to the system, you now build this MCV (Crawler) through which you can unlimitedly spam units until you reach a unit cap, thus equalling an effective stalemate unless you're vastly superior to the other person, have team mates, or your enemy spends half the time picking their nose. It's boring and unimaginative, Whopee, Rocks Paper Scissors units. No tiberium harvesting, no base, spamtastic, stalemates, not very fun. I don't know *why* this game is even labeled as command and conquer. The story is also sub-par compared to the other C&C games, and tries way to hard to take itself seriously. There's no cute cheesy sci-fi fun. It's all gruff, boring, and blocky. Expand
  96. ms
    Mar 29, 2010
    1
    This is not command and conquer. this is a dawn of war II ripoff that died in its development, then killed a little more when they decided that one of its main gameplay types was going to be multiplayer. I have no qualms with normal rts multiplayer; in fact i quite enjoy it. however, when the system is based on spawning in an rts game with no resource management or base building, then i This is not command and conquer. this is a dawn of war II ripoff that died in its development, then killed a little more when they decided that one of its main gameplay types was going to be multiplayer. I have no qualms with normal rts multiplayer; in fact i quite enjoy it. however, when the system is based on spawning in an rts game with no resource management or base building, then i have a problem. I admit, dawn of war II had no base building, but its multiplayer was supposed to be smaller, and it still had resource gathering and micromanaging. this had nothing, no strategic depth, or even a workable game. In the 5 hours ive been playing, i got to level 2 about 7 times. way to go, EA. youve completely destroyed an amazing franchise. Expand
  97. KevinQ.
    Apr 19, 2010
    1
    Worst, game, ever... The gameplay is horrible, mainly because Ea tried to change the type of style. Instead of changing it to Command and Conquer, they changed it to Dawn Of War. I loved the command and conquer series, but ea made command and conquer 4 bad. It has no base building, nor resource collecting. The storyline is just horrible. Multilayer is full of stupidity, mainly because its Worst, game, ever... The gameplay is horrible, mainly because Ea tried to change the type of style. Instead of changing it to Command and Conquer, they changed it to Dawn Of War. I loved the command and conquer series, but ea made command and conquer 4 bad. It has no base building, nor resource collecting. The storyline is just horrible. Multilayer is full of stupidity, mainly because its just unfair for beginner gamers of CnC4. This game has no strategic ideals, nor anything else. This game isn't worth it. If you are a Classic CnC fan, do not buy this. Its a waste of money. Expand
  98. Feb 26, 2011
    1
    I had been a fan of the C&C series from the beginning before it was even on Win95 (I think I still have the Pre-Win 95 disk kicking around somewhere) back when Westwood was still around. I don't say that to brag but so that anyone reading this understands where I am coming from. Hell i even have C&C Renegade. The FPS that could have been more all though it was fun. I say all that to say ifI had been a fan of the C&C series from the beginning before it was even on Win95 (I think I still have the Pre-Win 95 disk kicking around somewhere) back when Westwood was still around. I don't say that to brag but so that anyone reading this understands where I am coming from. Hell i even have C&C Renegade. The FPS that could have been more all though it was fun. I say all that to say if you are a C&C fan stay away from this game, it is seriously not up to par with the rest of the series. and for everyone who defends this game as a C&C game should actually go back and play some of the older games to see what C&C is. Expand
  99. Aug 23, 2010
    0
    The most important words of the review: DO NOT BUY! This is not a Command and Conquer game, this is some other game pretending that it is a C&C game. Sure, the campy cut scenes are nice and all, but if I wanted to only watch the cut scenes, I would have just found the videos for it online. For the game itself, not worth the money. I pre-ordered this game--after playing every other C&CThe most important words of the review: DO NOT BUY! This is not a Command and Conquer game, this is some other game pretending that it is a C&C game. Sure, the campy cut scenes are nice and all, but if I wanted to only watch the cut scenes, I would have just found the videos for it online. For the game itself, not worth the money. I pre-ordered this game--after playing every other C&C game, I will not trust a C&C game until after it comes out, and probably has some discounts again. Collapse
  100. Jan 1, 2011
    0
    You know, I can live with the whole "mobile base" thing that they have going on. I don't entirely mind the RPS combat... but I can't stand how boring this game is. I've never been so bored in my entire life while playing a video game. The story was awful, absolutely terrible. The acting was was easily the worst in the series (as was the story). I've gotta say, this game probably destroyedYou know, I can live with the whole "mobile base" thing that they have going on. I don't entirely mind the RPS combat... but I can't stand how boring this game is. I've never been so bored in my entire life while playing a video game. The story was awful, absolutely terrible. The acting was was easily the worst in the series (as was the story). I've gotta say, this game probably destroyed the franchise... I know I won't pick up another C&C after this and judging from the reviews I don't expect anyone else to either. Expand
  101. Aug 23, 2010
    0
    The most important words of the review: DO NOT BUY! This is not a Command and Conquer game, this is some other game pretending that it is a C&C game. Sure, the campy cut scenes are nice and all, but if I wanted to only watch the cut scenes, I would have just found the videos for it online. For the game itself, not worth the money. I pre-ordered this game--after playing every other C&CThe most important words of the review: DO NOT BUY! This is not a Command and Conquer game, this is some other game pretending that it is a C&C game. Sure, the campy cut scenes are nice and all, but if I wanted to only watch the cut scenes, I would have just found the videos for it online. For the game itself, not worth the money. I pre-ordered this game--after playing every other C&C game, I will not trust a C&C game until after it comes out, and probably has some discounts again. Collapse
Metascore
64

Mixed or average reviews - based on 71 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 71
  2. Negative: 11 out of 71
  1. It's nothing at all like Command & Conquer, but - eventually - it's a thoughtful and bombastic multiplayer RTS that's welcoming to everyone.
  2. Tiberian Twilight's online play and persistent unlocks make for short-term fun, but the mediocre campaign doesn't give Kane the send-off he deserved.
  3. 75
    It's clear that EA are onto something with their new-age C&C formula but, as it stands, the core needs a little work. The series, once the most explosive game of the medium, looks like it's going out with a whimper.