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. Apr 19, 2015
    3
    One of the best games series of all times, to be kicked on to its knees with googly units covered with nursery made honey and paper. It feels you are leading cartoon characters to fight! When units fire it does not feel like they do anything except maybe throwing paper planes. In previous C&C’s you could feel and hear a rocket being fired and rocket hitting the target. Here it feels thatOne of the best games series of all times, to be kicked on to its knees with googly units covered with nursery made honey and paper. It feels you are leading cartoon characters to fight! When units fire it does not feel like they do anything except maybe throwing paper planes. In previous C&C’s you could feel and hear a rocket being fired and rocket hitting the target. Here it feels that just a swarm of flies is flying around. In first C&C tanks where made of metal, exploding when destroyed and solders where dying when shoot at them. In Twilight you don’t notice when something is gone.
    No economy whatsoever – big critical part of the game missing. Everyone wants to collect tiberium, and have harvesters!
    Why to do something like this, I am playing it and will try to finish it through very painful gameplay just so I can see epic film scenes that are still surprisingly fantastic!!
    It seems that large companies all around world are unable to see why the first games where/are popular, like it is lost through machinery of offices and people that are trying to “better” something that is already unique. It is like someone took game of football and changed outfits in warm yellow/pink onesies filled with fluffy cotton and wool. Also installing seats on the field and sitting players down, only letting them throw the ball to each other without running or fighting for it with glows on and ball made of wool. You cannot beat first feeling I had when C&C was installed on my MS-DOS system but you could have continued it. EA has ripped its soul out that was created by the Westowood team. Why to destroy something beautiful?

    3 points just for film cut scenes!
    Expand
  2. Apr 13, 2015
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is by far the worst Command and Conquer game that follows the Tiberium war to DATE, I heavily dis like the fact that you cannot build a base and you can only construct units from a single heavy walker and you have a little controlled zone, I just dont like it, its to controlling, you are very restricted on what you can do.

    Its defiantly a real let down after Command and Conquer 3 Kane's Wrath, if you to play any of Tiberium war games, Play Cnc 3 and its expansion Kane's Wrath.
    Expand
  3. Jan 28, 2015
    0
    boring,cheesy,lame with shyty DRM.dont even dare 2 put money on itttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
  4. Dec 29, 2014
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It is not real time strategy game, it is a real time tactic game. You don't have to manage ressources, base construction or anything like that, just your units, their placement and checking they target the good ennemies when you send them somewhere to defend an area.

    The cutscenes that make the game story are a complete failures in three points, most actors are bland and don't give a real life to their characters, and the dialogs are a total mess. Also their is the slight fact that they did not bother to try to make their . You're in 2077 ,laser and EM weapons have existed in your universe for more than 40 years (tiberian sun happened in 2034) and you still use the most basic of handguns to escape jail.

    The storyline completely went over the Scrin Invasion presented in the tiberium wars secret campaign and Kane's wrath ending to just focus on Kane ascending.

    In short, the changes in gameplay are an attempt to fix something that was never broken. The changes in the story are an attempt to make you forget there was 3 playable armies.
    Expand
  5. Nov 27, 2014
    0
    Burn in hell with this **** game! What is this? Wonderfull game Tiberium Wars+expansion Kane´s Wrath and you do this...Terrible, horrible and other terrible words for this repulsiveness...Dont buy it!! It isnt classic C&C RTS game, it is ****
  6. 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.
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. Sep 14, 2014
    2
    I think I see a typo in the title there the command and conquer part doesn't seem to fit correctly.

    I actually got this game twice funny story bought it brand new installed it started a game gave me a cute option to be attack defense or support im thinking ughm ok then selected one seen pop cap seen I couldn't really build bases like previous games and said well screw this not playing
    I think I see a typo in the title there the command and conquer part doesn't seem to fit correctly.

    I actually got this game twice funny story
    bought it brand new installed it started a game gave me a cute option to be attack defense or support im thinking ughm ok then selected one seen pop cap seen I couldn't really build bases like previous games and said well screw this not playing you no more so some may seen this as bias but theres more

    went and got the ultimate collection which came with this garbage game again gave it a second chance graphics were well ok I suppose I think command and conquer 3 was tuned up a bit better especially how nice the tiberium fields looked and the ambience of the whole environment anyways enough about that so played it tried to give it a fair chance its user interface is changed for the worse I believe build style for the small handful of buildings similar to red alert 2 but worse (yes somehow over 10 years they made something worse that worked before) ontop of that it did not have a command and conquer feel to it felt like some cheap rip off like how flappy bird is to angry birds lol don't have much else to say that hasn't already been said by a angry crowd of 508 people

    I would suggest look into a lot of gameplay for this game if it still somehow interests you maybe you may like it where most do not.
    Expand
  10. 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 !
  11. 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!!
  12. May 19, 2014
    0
    Holy Christ what a **** up. The game is unintelligible if you are expecting some RTS action like C&C or any of the others in the genre. I'd bought it a while ago, tried it once and hated it. Reinstalled recently just to see if it was actually playable and, nope, first impression was correct. Most games you can perceive what the goal is, what you are doing etc, this is just a mess.Holy Christ what a **** up. The game is unintelligible if you are expecting some RTS action like C&C or any of the others in the genre. I'd bought it a while ago, tried it once and hated it. Reinstalled recently just to see if it was actually playable and, nope, first impression was correct. Most games you can perceive what the goal is, what you are doing etc, this is just a mess. Someone oughta have lost their job over this one.

    Leveling system? WTf, its not an MMORPG and you generally play a game like this to get right in the action, not grind to see it.

    The "unlocking" crap is stupid, every supposed stand alone game that does this, I quit buying their products, ie I liked Battlefield and BF Vietnam, but they started that locked features crap that you had to play so many games or online to unlock - no more buys of their product either.

    Thank God I have Supreme Commander (Total Annihilation reboot), as most of the RTS I enjoyed in the 902 and early 2000s have gone to crap.
    Expand
  13. Apr 19, 2014
    2
    Command and Conquer 4 is by far the worst in the series. Yeah the graphics were nice but that couldn't mask just how poor the game was. Crawlers are ok, heck Id rather have one instead of an MCV because of the lasers but having a "class" that limits what units you can use? Having no buildings? Unit caps? A earn-points-to-win system? Sorry but I'm going back to my old tactic of plantingCommand and Conquer 4 is by far the worst in the series. Yeah the graphics were nice but that couldn't mask just how poor the game was. Crawlers are ok, heck Id rather have one instead of an MCV because of the lasers but having a "class" that limits what units you can use? Having no buildings? Unit caps? A earn-points-to-win system? Sorry but I'm going back to my old tactic of planting rigs everywhere back in C&C 3 or Spy and javelin APV tactic in RA3. Though saying this, the concept of the general ranks to unlock units In my opinion, was quite good and may have been a quite smart feature if the game itself had not been horrible.

    Ps: Generals 2: A free game with a similar unlock system but buildings and no caps. Only problem I can see is micro transactions.

    PPS: If EA had really wanted to they could have cut this game and restarted like other games. Still waiting for C&C: Renegade 2 and it's explanation of how the soviet union turned into NOD.
    Expand
  14. 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
  15. 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 ****
  16. Dec 16, 2013
    0
    The game was poorly designed for multiple reason. First the lack of bases is detrimental from the start, not staying true to the series at all. Now I could have forgiven the whole no base thing, but the rest of the game is poorly designed slop I could not over-look it! The graphic style is cartoonish and goofy, it simply doesn't feel right at all. But perhaps my biggest beef with the gamesThe game was poorly designed for multiple reason. First the lack of bases is detrimental from the start, not staying true to the series at all. Now I could have forgiven the whole no base thing, but the rest of the game is poorly designed slop I could not over-look it! The graphic style is cartoonish and goofy, it simply doesn't feel right at all. But perhaps my biggest beef with the games are the units. No single unit has that "bite" there is no "kick" to any of the units. You get your awesome t3 kick butt GDI Mammoth out... and it does only a little more damage than your main battle tanks... it feels frustrating sluggish as a game and I am thoroughly disappointed in EA for making such a pathetic excuse for a CnC game, don't waste your money on this hunk of garbage, get a real game and go back to CnC3:KW Expand
  17. Nov 30, 2013
    0
    You can't even call this command and conquer despite units with the C&C look.
    It is nothing like command and conquer at all and the gameplay is boring and torturing. It is the first time I haven't finished the gameplay of neither GDI nor NOD sides and go to youtube to watch the ending.

    P.S. I am more than qualified to view this game. I have been playing C&C since its DOS version.
  18. 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
  19. Oct 27, 2013
    5
    Yeah, way to throw the baby out with the bath water here. The concept of the moving changeable base is ok enough but it's sadly not as good as the original base build structure. It wasn't broke, it didn't need fixing. Add to this the FMV which is sadly not as well acted or starred as the original games. It basically comes off like this... Imagine Star Wars VII came out and it was a madeYeah, way to throw the baby out with the bath water here. The concept of the moving changeable base is ok enough but it's sadly not as good as the original base build structure. It wasn't broke, it didn't need fixing. Add to this the FMV which is sadly not as well acted or starred as the original games. It basically comes off like this... Imagine Star Wars VII came out and it was a made for TV movie by the sci-fi channel. Pretty much like that. Expand
  20. Sep 17, 2013
    10
    This game is for those who like more action... a mix of RPG and RTS... I like both... the majority who voted negative probably never played.
    I just had bought the command conquer in playstation one a long time ago, because all versions are similar, but this caught my attention, thanks for that!
  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. 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
  23. Aug 9, 2013
    10
    I don't know why so many people hate this game... 15 Years passed from the third Tiberium War(2047-2062), and the Earth was contaminated, there were no blue zones, and the humans need something new to survive They can't build bases in the Tiberium fields), and they needed some bases that can be moved Let's say a Tiberium Storm hits the zone, all of the base is destroyed, because it can'tI don't know why so many people hate this game... 15 Years passed from the third Tiberium War(2047-2062), and the Earth was contaminated, there were no blue zones, and the humans need something new to survive They can't build bases in the Tiberium fields), and they needed some bases that can be moved Let's say a Tiberium Storm hits the zone, all of the base is destroyed, because it can't move) and this is where the crawlers we're invented... These MCV's are bases but they can pack up and get out of the zone if a storm comes. When almost all of the earth was full with tiberium, only some yellow zones, then GDI and The Brotherhood of Nod sided, and made the TCN Tiberium Control Nodes This was the key to survival...

    I still don't understand what people have with this game. I think its very nice.
    Expand
  24. 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.
  25. 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.
  26. 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....
  27. 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".
  28. 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
  29. 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.
  30. 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
  31. Dec 31, 2012
    0
    Obligatory 0 for online-only DRM. An unforgivable offence. There might be something worth playing under the DRM, but I'd have to pirate it to find out.
  32. 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.
  33. Dec 19, 2012
    5
    It was a bad game Command & Conquer series of large kedvencem.A biggest negative is that the material removed from the construction proceeds think it really should not have.
  34. Dec 19, 2012
    3
    What the hell were EA thinking? This was supposed to be epic ending for beloved game series and what did we got? No base-building, **** multiplayer, **** plot and hideous DRM! I know Westwood made SOME **** C&C games too but at least they were just spin-offs, not sequels.
  35. 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
  36. Nov 18, 2012
    8
    the game is good, highly details and with lots of units,powers and upgrades. yes the cut scenes are a bit chessy but the game is good. not exellent but good.
  37. Aug 6, 2012
    3
    As many have said, this game is not so much bad as mis-labled. EA made a huge mistake by trying to reinvent C&C gameplay in the final installment of a much-beloved series. Moreover, the storyline and acting was lousy and boring. After all this time of trying to figure out what Kane's master plan is, what the true origins of Nod are, what the fate of the planet will be, etc. this game givesAs many have said, this game is not so much bad as mis-labled. EA made a huge mistake by trying to reinvent C&C gameplay in the final installment of a much-beloved series. Moreover, the storyline and acting was lousy and boring. After all this time of trying to figure out what Kane's master plan is, what the true origins of Nod are, what the fate of the planet will be, etc. this game gives the player a huge middle finger. The gameplay itself is very annoying and confusing, and a pointless leveling system means that you need to play single player first if you want to have a shot in multiplayer (which might actually be a little fun). Expand
  38. Jul 22, 2012
    1
    So I picked up C&C 4 tonight because it was on steam sale for $5 dollars, and I believe I overpaid for it. It really disapointed me how much I dislike C&C 4. I played it for just over an hour, and that was all I could take. It just so bad that it doesn't even resemble the C&C series that I remember fondly. Where did the resource gathering go? Why are there now 3 different types of MCV'sSo I picked up C&C 4 tonight because it was on steam sale for $5 dollars, and I believe I overpaid for it. It really disapointed me how much I dislike C&C 4. I played it for just over an hour, and that was all I could take. It just so bad that it doesn't even resemble the C&C series that I remember fondly. Where did the resource gathering go? Why are there now 3 different types of MCV's that I seem to have to switch between just to keep up with the AI? Why does the game seem to be forcing me around the map multiple times? Why are the graphic settings set to minimal as default? Why can't I adjust said setting while in a mission? Why is it when I set the graphic settings to max, that it still looks like a game from 6 years ago? Just so much wrong here and besides the guy that plays Kane, there's nothing here that even remotely resembles the C&C I know and love. I give the game a 1 purely because the actor who played Kane was still in it. Expand
  39. Jul 21, 2012
    10
    I really like this game, i know its not the traditional C&C game but its a change. I like what they did because it makes the game very fast paced, there is also a lot more action then the other games. People were getting mad because they were not changing the game and as soon as they did everyone got all mad, i give EA props for taking the risk. I love this game and its worth the time and money!
  40. 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.
  41. 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
  42. Jul 5, 2012
    1
    I am incredibly disappointed in this game... Definitely not the Command and Conquer that I used to play. If Westwood sees this utter garbage. They should definitely sue EA for this nonsense that they have created.
  43. Jul 4, 2012
    0
    Very disappointed for a great series. C&C4 doesn't belongs to C&C series. It should be called by another name. EA has betrayed all the fan of C&C, no base building, no resource management, just ask for troops and keep attacking to take the point. If you haven't play C&C before, don't buy this game. If you still want to try this C&C4, I suggest you buying Company of heroes.
  44. Jun 23, 2012
    0
    I've been a huge fan of the C&C series since the first. I even loved the underrated Renegade spin-off. When I heard C&C 4 was coming out I was beyond happy. However I held off on buying the game until I found it really cheap because it contains lame DRM which requires you to be online at all time. After finally buying it and popping it in I was very let down to say the least.. First offI've been a huge fan of the C&C series since the first. I even loved the underrated Renegade spin-off. When I heard C&C 4 was coming out I was beyond happy. However I held off on buying the game until I found it really cheap because it contains lame DRM which requires you to be online at all time. After finally buying it and popping it in I was very let down to say the least.. First off it plays nothing like any of the other games in the series. Building is nearly non-existant, as is mining ore. About all you can build is units from a mobile factory which each side has. You are also restricted no only by a very strict unit cap, but which units you can build as well. You see in C&C 4 you have ranks. Your rank depends on what units you are allowed to build. This means for awhile you're going to be stuck with a few weak as heck units. This is not only in single player, but multi as well. It makes things so unbalanced and needlessly difficult it ruins the entire game. This game is horrible to say the least. I don't usually condone piracy, but with this one I can say the pirates got a better version. Not only can they play it offline, but they didn't pay a dime for this crap. Seriously, this has got to be one of the worst RTS games I have ever played and I have played a lot. Expand
  45. May 10, 2012
    0
    I wanted to play this game as I played and enjoyed most of the C&C and Red Alert games through my teens and into my adulthood. But this review, sadly, is not about how good or bad the game is, or how it lives up to or lets down the franchise. I bought the game through Steam during a sale, and over the past year I have tried to play it many times. It has never once actually worked, andI wanted to play this game as I played and enjoyed most of the C&C and Red Alert games through my teens and into my adulthood. But this review, sadly, is not about how good or bad the game is, or how it lives up to or lets down the franchise. I bought the game through Steam during a sale, and over the past year I have tried to play it many times. It has never once actually worked, and trying to find any support for the game has utterly failed. I essentially paid to register an account with EA, give them some personal information, and never get to play the title I purchased. I don't know if it is the DRM, or a problem with Windows 7, or something else in the code. Every other Steam game I have purchased has been playable. The support forums unfortunately backed up my experience. So give this game a miss. If you pay for it, you may get nothing but frustration in return. Expand
  46. Apr 17, 2012
    0
    OK this game sucks big time!! the story is no good, the only good actor is the guy that plays Kane, the game play is only good if you are a rusher because there is no base building or harvesting tiberium, they have a limit on how many units you can have which on the old command and conquer games the only limit to how many units you could build was how much tiberium was on the map. also iOK this game sucks big time!! the story is no good, the only good actor is the guy that plays Kane, the game play is only good if you are a rusher because there is no base building or harvesting tiberium, they have a limit on how many units you can have which on the old command and conquer games the only limit to how many units you could build was how much tiberium was on the map. also i hated that they made it where units like the cyborg commando and the mammoth tank where only good at killing a select few units and they could not kill bases at all any more. when i played command and conquer tiberium sun the cyborg command could take out an entire base all by its self if easy.

    on top of all that the ending just sucked. the portal that Kane went through looked like it was painted on to a white wall and this is a portal build by the Scrin. Also Kane would never side with GDI. If i remember it right in command and conquer 3 tiberium wars Kane was really mad that who ever the second in command on that game was sided with GDI and saw the Scrin as a bigger threat.

    So all in all if you like the old C&C games and have been playing from C&C tiberium dawn which was the one made in 1995 then you will not like C&C 4. For truly I say to you this game would not be worth getting even if it was free and that it would have been better for EA games to just have ended command and conquer with command and conquer Kane's wrath.
    Expand
  47. Mar 26, 2012
    2
    This game takes what I, personally, loved most, and chucked it out the window. No more base-building, no more resource management. Just OK, HERE ARE YOUR GUYS AND SOME LITTLE BUILDINGS GO KILL THINGS. The only reason this is getting a 2 is because it looks good and at least kept the live-action cut scenes. That's all it really kept from previous titles. Don't buy this game if you were aThis game takes what I, personally, loved most, and chucked it out the window. No more base-building, no more resource management. Just OK, HERE ARE YOUR GUYS AND SOME LITTLE BUILDINGS GO KILL THINGS. The only reason this is getting a 2 is because it looks good and at least kept the live-action cut scenes. That's all it really kept from previous titles. Don't buy this game if you were a fan of previous titles. Expand
  48. Mar 25, 2012
    0
    This game is absolute trash. EA strike again with their opportunistic cash-is-the-prime-directive behavior, by riding out the franchise until it's dead in the water. It's clear than EA have squeezed the absolute life out of this franchise as the quality of anything they've release related to the series has been inferior since Tiberium Sun.

    Joke's on you EA. Enjoy your expensive critical
    This game is absolute trash. EA strike again with their opportunistic cash-is-the-prime-directive behavior, by riding out the franchise until it's dead in the water. It's clear than EA have squeezed the absolute life out of this franchise as the quality of anything they've release related to the series has been inferior since Tiberium Sun.

    Joke's on you EA. Enjoy your expensive critical panning. Not even worth pirating. Disgusting.
    Expand
  49. Feb 29, 2012
    5
    MAYBE, just maybe if it were not part of the "Command & Conquer TIBERIAN" series it would have done better. From a avid fan of the series since the beginning i can tell you that it is not what the series fans enjoy.
    But that being said, just like C&C Red Alert, this is different, and just like red alert, maybe this idea of no base building should have been used in another C&C series. If
    MAYBE, just maybe if it were not part of the "Command & Conquer TIBERIAN" series it would have done better. From a avid fan of the series since the beginning i can tell you that it is not what the series fans enjoy.
    But that being said, just like C&C Red Alert, this is different, and just like red alert, maybe this idea of no base building should have been used in another C&C series. If you forget about the base building, which is very hard to do because after all C&C is ALL ABOUT BASE BUILDING, than you might have a decent strategy game.
    Expand
  50. Jan 1, 2012
    0
    There was nothing that made it C&C aside from the name and Cane. Simply not fun at all. The strategy aspect is almost gone completely. Make more units for free, zerg them, build more for free, oh that base is down....wake me when I won again.
    Lastly, the campaign cannot be beaten unless you have another player or unless you have levelled up in multi player (which sucks worse than the
    There was nothing that made it C&C aside from the name and Cane. Simply not fun at all. The strategy aspect is almost gone completely. Make more units for free, zerg them, build more for free, oh that base is down....wake me when I won again.
    Lastly, the campaign cannot be beaten unless you have another player or unless you have levelled up in multi player (which sucks worse than the main game) to level up enough to do it solo. I have no problem with co-op games, RA3 you would do single or co-op.....but it was beatable either way. Even their online community said it cant be done at my level, and they were surprised I got as far as I did. They took everything that made C&C fun and took it away. Way to kill a franchise.....
    Expand
  51. Jan 1, 2012
    0
    Why did this get released? How can a big company like EA let something like this happen?
    There has to be someone in charge of giving the final "O.K." to release a certain product in a certain condition in a company like EA but judged by this game there simply isnt. Even then basic common sense should tell anyone that such garbage needs to get deleted instead of released.
  52. Dec 31, 2011
    2
    I picked up this game for 5$. I want my five dollars back.

    I think that that should set the tone for this review. None of the elements from the Tiberium games are in the game. No base building, no choosing your own play style, no actual strategy, simply build guys and throw them at the target until you are bored. The paper/rock/scissors type strength/weakness system added needless
    I picked up this game for 5$. I want my five dollars back.

    I think that that should set the tone for this review. None of the elements from the Tiberium games are in the game. No base building, no choosing your own play style, no actual strategy, simply build guys and throw them at the target until you are bored.

    The paper/rock/scissors type strength/weakness system added needless non-intuitive complication. For what it's worth, for the short time that I played the game, it looks like the graphics were good, the environments were interesting, and that the sound and music were of good quality. It's really too bad that I have no intention of playing any further in the game to find out if the story was interesting.

    Here's hoping Bioware treats the C&C series like it should be. Or that C&C5 will return to the previous gameplay style.
    Expand
  53. 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
  54. Jul 24, 2011
    0
    Basic theme of my review: You loved CnC 1 / 1.5 / 2 / 2.5 / 3 / 3.5? Don't waste your 4$ on this game like I unfortunately did.

    Long gone are the days where you would start off with little to now power and units and were expected to use skill and strategy to obtain resources and build up an army. No, today's version of Command and Conquer gets rid of all these silly concepts, puts you
    Basic theme of my review: You loved CnC 1 / 1.5 / 2 / 2.5 / 3 / 3.5? Don't waste your 4$ on this game like I unfortunately did.

    Long gone are the days where you would start off with little to now power and units and were expected to use skill and strategy to obtain resources and build up an army. No, today's version of Command and Conquer gets rid of all these silly concepts, puts you down with *one* main building whose purpose is to... let you build from a list of all your available units right from the start, mass them up at no cost to you, send them on a killing spree, and repeat. This game would have earned points for its XP system of leveling up to unlock things had it done things right, or at least attempted to steal the ideas from Starcraft 2. But no, in CnC4 you aren't given the biggest tanks for the biggest missions, you need to unlock them by grinding, because that's what the last hope for the world has to do, right?
    Graphics look pretty, but then again you wouldn't be playing this series if you cared more about the graphics than the actual gameplay.
    Finally, I tried the skirmish mode against a computer since there is absolutely no one on multiplayer these days, and it's the same thing as single player: boring and repetitive.
    Expand
  55. Jul 7, 2011
    0
    A Command and Conquer game without LAN play? .... no base building? ... It's only USD$4 on steam but this crap is not even worth that... sorry EA but after this and Bad company 2.... i will never be purchasing an EA game again.... you destroy franchises.

    Battlefield and Command and Conquer use to be 2 of my favorite games.... and there is a reason me and my friends still play red alert
    A Command and Conquer game without LAN play? .... no base building? ... It's only USD$4 on steam but this crap is not even worth that... sorry EA but after this and Bad company 2.... i will never be purchasing an EA game again.... you destroy franchises.

    Battlefield and Command and Conquer use to be 2 of my favorite games.... and there is a reason me and my friends still play red alert 2 and BFV over your new games...
    Expand
  56. Jul 7, 2011
    0
    This is not the C&C i used to play....
    i am open for changes only if they are doing something good and make the game more fun and enjoyable
    but i can't find any of them... also i am a big fan of the mission crossing screen and movie... C&C or i should say WESTWOOD did it very well in the past and in C&C4....what EA have create is some sort of stupid class B movie style crap... i would say
    This is not the C&C i used to play....
    i am open for changes only if they are doing something good and make the game more fun and enjoyable
    but i can't find any of them...
    also i am a big fan of the mission crossing screen and movie... C&C or i should say WESTWOOD did it very well in the past
    and in C&C4....what EA have create is some sort of stupid class B movie style crap...
    i would say even the C&C 1 movie is better than C&C4 except the increase of resolution....
    Expand
  57. May 16, 2011
    1
    This game is mournful. As of the time of this writing, it's available from Steam for twenty dollars. I passed C&C4 by when it came out last year, wary from the reviews and videos I had seen, and only picked it up now while the RTS genre is fairly dry.

    It is absolutely not worth it. If this game were being given away it would still cost too much in hard-drive space alone to justify
    This game is mournful. As of the time of this writing, it's available from Steam for twenty dollars. I passed C&C4 by when it came out last year, wary from the reviews and videos I had seen, and only picked it up now while the RTS genre is fairly dry.

    It is absolutely not worth it. If this game were being given away it would still cost too much in hard-drive space alone to justify owning it. This is the worst RTS I can remember owning in over a decade. It is a betrayal, a betrayal of the franchise, of the fans, and of EA's customers in general.

    The Command and Conquer franchise has always had some common traits constant between all its games, from the original to the Red Alert series and even the short-lived Generals spin off. You build a base, you build structures along a tech-tree, you unlock more advanced units by building the corresponding buildings, you amass a force free of any arbitrary population cap, and you wage quick, brutal, and often unforgiving war. Command and Conquer 4 has none of that. Not a single defining point of the franchise is present. Not. A. One. Resource gathering is gone. Base building is replaced by a single 'crawler' mobile facility that builds all available units once its deployed. Your army is limited by an infuriatingly low population cap since actual units are produced without any sort of resource cost. The closest thing to a tech-tree is a list of upgrades you can purchase at your crawler if you capture special tiberium crystals and return them to your base, almost like a capture the flag mini-game. Since there are no bases and units (including the crawlers) are produced neigh instantly and freely, victory depends on capture points which are won over by standing near them until a sliding bar swings to your faction. The only analogue I can think of is a rather despised mechanic Blizzard has incorporated into one of its World of Warcraft multiplayer battlegrounds. Indeed, the entire affair feels more like haphazardly managing an MMO than playing an actual real time strategy game. The more I think of it, the more like an MMO this game feels. The campaign is available in single-player but its clearly balanced around a poorly implemented co-op approach, to the extent that you can't start a mission without being put into a chat-room of C&C4 players. Most disturbingly, you'll see people advertise games to grind experience in these channels, since higher tech-units are now dependent on experienced gathered from your playing account. You have to grind experience to build units. Let that sink in. It is exactly as awful as it sounds. Its myriad technical and mechanical problems aside, what I object to the most is its presentation. I was replaying C&C 3 out of nostalgia before I decided to buy this game, and I firmly believe C&C 3 had better graphics, despite coming out four years before hand. C&C4 may have higher polygon counts and better lighting, but there was a baffling aesthetic change in the transition that makes everything look like building blocks. Gone are the sleek and hard lines, the fascinating alien bio-mechanical fusion, the gleam of light off tanks, and any sort of attempt at a realistic presentation. Now every unit looks like a child cobbled it together out of building blocks. It's almost cartoonish. And you'll have plenty of time to savor that, as it takes forever for anything to kill anything else now, vastly slowing down C&C's famous fast tempo. And the story... Merciful gods the story... C&C 3 had an extensive world-building side to it. It detailed the ravages of a tiberium future. It spun a cohesive narrative and had players scrambling for hidden objectives that unlocked intelligence notes, entries on units, events, and background that gave no other reward than simply learning about the setting. And they were fascinating enough that many players spent a lot of time hunting them down (just look at the number of online intel guides for proof). C&C 4 does none of that. It actively tries to get you to forget plot points from its predecessor. It erases the setting earlier games masterfully erected. The actual story is irrelevant because you won't be able to follow it; cut-scenes and briefings are overly melodramatic yet carry no real information. You'll be wondering 'why?' at the start of almost every mission. It's like reading a comic where half the panels were blacked out.

    Five thousand characters isn't enough to bemoan this wretched travesty. Command and Conquer deserved better than this. There isn't a single redeeming quality to this game. It is pathetic. EA knows this; it retails for half the price of its predecessor, despite being four years younger. I give it one point because it exists and doesn't actively give you cancer. That's really the best that can be said about it.
    Expand
  58. Apr 25, 2011
    3
    It was brave of them to take an established money making franchise and flip the whole thing like a pancake. Not many companies have the balls to do that. Too bad the end result was a game that had nothing to do with C&C gameplay and made for a completely undesirable game
  59. Mar 4, 2011
    2
    I have been a huge fan of Command and Conquer for many years, and own all the games. However, when they started to announce this game and it was discovered that base building had been removed I said "pass"

    I didn't buy the game till it was on sale on Steam for 5 dollars the other week, and I still think I paid to much. It is not even a C&C game. No bases and all about micro. For the last
    I have been a huge fan of Command and Conquer for many years, and own all the games. However, when they started to announce this game and it was discovered that base building had been removed I said "pass"

    I didn't buy the game till it was on sale on Steam for 5 dollars the other week, and I still think I paid to much. It is not even a C&C game. No bases and all about micro. For the last game in the series it was massively disappointing. Why after years of success would they alter the design so drastically. I have about 3 hours of play, and have no desire to play any more. If you were an uber micro person that always built minimal bases anyway you may enjoy the game. But if you are a macro player that just plays casually in Skirmish and used the game as your "offline" option, then this is not for you. Stick with C&C3
    Expand
  60. 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
  61. 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
  62. 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
  63. Jan 13, 2011
    7
    For anyone considering this game, don't pay attention to the reviews that claim it's the worst game ever, and that it ruined the C&C series. This game is excellent. The people who are putting it down, are doing so not because it's a bad game, but because they expected another sidebar, billion unit RTS with little interaction with the maps, and little micromanagement, like the rest of theFor anyone considering this game, don't pay attention to the reviews that claim it's the worst game ever, and that it ruined the C&C series. This game is excellent. The people who are putting it down, are doing so not because it's a bad game, but because they expected another sidebar, billion unit RTS with little interaction with the maps, and little micromanagement, like the rest of the Command and Conquer games have been. Truth be told, I actually enjoy this style of game much more than I have the previous C&C games. This is coming from a gamer who has played and owned StarCraft: Brood War, StarCraft 2, Warcraft 3 Frozen Throne, Dawn of War 2, Company of Heroes, and all the Age of Empires games. This game takes the series down a more tactical route. There is more focus on army placement and management, and proper use of focus firing with the correct counter units. It has adopted the DoW style of gameplay with control nodes, which I also like, because it forces you out onto the map to engage in battle, rather than simply camping in your base for 15 minutes until its time to fight. The graphics are simply beautiful, and run smoothly on high settings, even on my par system. I give EA credit, as well, for the originality here. Mobile MCV's are a cool addition, and you'll find a plethora of very interesting unit abilities to micromanage. You'll also find strategically placed capturable turrets and Mutant Hovels, which are similar to mercenary camps in WarCraft 3. placed on most of the multiplayer maps.

    Though the hotkeys are not customizable, you'll find most of them are mapped based on their position on the UI, which makes them easy to remember and get used to. There are a ton of units, all of which have their use, and the game is just plain fun. I actually stopped playing StarCraft 2 since I starting playing this game. It's not so fast paced that have a heart attack during every encounter, hence it gives you time to think about your moves and plan out strategies. The battles are fluent, and the unit pathing is smooth.

    Again, excellent game despite the fanboy criticisms. Easily worth the money for any PC RTS fan.
    Expand
  64. Jan 5, 2011
    6
    Tiberium Twilight brings an end to the decade-long Tiberium saga, but why the developers chose the terminal chapter of their iconic Command and Conquer series to attempt a radical new direction is beyond many. In essence, C&C 4 is all flash and little substance. Gorgeous visuals and an excellent soundtrack come at the cost of stripped down gameplay and a less-than-stellar telling of Kane'sTiberium Twilight brings an end to the decade-long Tiberium saga, but why the developers chose the terminal chapter of their iconic Command and Conquer series to attempt a radical new direction is beyond many. In essence, C&C 4 is all flash and little substance. Gorgeous visuals and an excellent soundtrack come at the cost of stripped down gameplay and a less-than-stellar telling of Kane's final gambit in the long struggle between rival factions Nod and GDI. While the new pace of play may be frantic, removal of such things as resource management and base construction serve only to alienate this shell of a game from it's predecessors. Expand
  65. 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
  66. Nov 17, 2010
    10
    This is one of the worst command and conquer games I have ever played. The campaign was awful. The only thing nice about it was the multiplayer.
  67. Nov 17, 2010
    2
    i wish i could have been positive about Tiberium Twilight, but i can't.
    the C&C series have always been a traditional RTS(simple build,train,command,conquer), but 4 breaks that formula in a bad way.
    its okay if they want to try something else but they shouldn't use a well known series as a base for that. the story is also far below par. people who know a bit of the Tiberium universe
    i wish i could have been positive about Tiberium Twilight, but i can't.
    the C&C series have always been a traditional RTS(simple build,train,command,conquer), but 4 breaks that formula in a bad way.
    its okay if they want to try something else but they shouldn't use a well known series as a base for that.
    the story is also far below par. people who know a bit of the Tiberium universe will probably find allot of loose ends in it.
    Expand
  68. Oct 4, 2010
    2
    It is not even RTS style like previous C&C games when I tried its betas. EA killed the series. C&C3 and its KW addon were the last good C&C games. Even the cutscenes were bad. :(
  69. Oct 3, 2010
    1
    Spoiler Alert: This is a turd of a product, not worthy of the C&C name. - This game is even worse than Red Alert 3. It is one of the many casualties of EA. May it rot in peace.
  70. 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. Expand
  71. Aug 16, 2010
    0
    Why oh why change a winning game into a mainstream game this is happening with alot of games now. think they have changed it to appeal to young kids. It is alot less fun and exiting than Command & Conquer 3 and such a waste of money to buy. Stick to what you know and make a proper RTS game not a KRTS (kids real time strategy).
  72. 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
  73. 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
  74. 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
  75. 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
  76. 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
  77. 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
  78. 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
  79. 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!!!
  80. brandonk
    Apr 13, 2010
    5
    I'm not gana rant about this because what i wana say has already been sed by almost every comment here i will say that if they make a expansion pack i wont buy it if they make cnc5 and they dont go back tah cnc3 style gameplay i wont buy it if they make redalert4 ill wait and see reviews and if it looks good ill buy it and if they come out with generals 2 and its done in the same wayI'm not gana rant about this because what i wana say has already been sed by almost every comment here i will say that if they make a expansion pack i wont buy it if they make cnc5 and they dont go back tah cnc3 style gameplay i wont buy it if they make redalert4 ill wait and see reviews and if it looks good ill buy it and if they come out with generals 2 and its done in the same way the original was but with video or sum thing ill buy it but if they don't abandon this style and they push it into the other universes aswell im just going to abandon cnc forever and as a hardcore fan that fact really saddens me as a random rts game 5/10 as a cnc game ZERO. Expand
  81. 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
  82. 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
  83. 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
  84. 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
  85. 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
  86. 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
  87. AlA.
    Mar 30, 2010
    8
    Oh come ooon! Cutscenes is horrible for sure ( no questions to Joe Kucan, even now he doing his job great- i love it) Overall about cutscenes: its feels like financial crysis, even compare to Tiberian Dawn. About gameplay... it's fun. Well, like many other people other here(or it's just my imagination), i play CNC since CNC TD. Many changes, etc, but its realy fun to play,feels Oh come ooon! Cutscenes is horrible for sure ( no questions to Joe Kucan, even now he doing his job great- i love it) Overall about cutscenes: its feels like financial crysis, even compare to Tiberian Dawn. About gameplay... it's fun. Well, like many other people other here(or it's just my imagination), i play CNC since CNC TD. Many changes, etc, but its realy fun to play,feels modern, not without some mistakes of course. If someone in EA read this now, just for future: never experiment on such a MONSTER brand like CNC, i mean never do it like this. BIG mistake, but NOT a complete fail. All because of fun multi and Kane (have no doubt that he will be back again, he always do) Kane lives in death!=) long live to all. Expand
  88. 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
  89. 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
  90. 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
  91. 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
  92. ChristianP.
    Mar 28, 2010
    0
    This is the worse game EVER!!! I thought red alert 3 was garage i stand corrected muliplayer sucks you play caputuring these control nods and first team to get to 2500 points wins... theres no room name changing theres no teams nod and gdi together.. there is no merging.. doesnt make any sense then game is about merging together as one but on muliplayer your seperated this is garbage i This is the worse game EVER!!! I thought red alert 3 was garage i stand corrected muliplayer sucks you play caputuring these control nods and first team to get to 2500 points wins... theres no room name changing theres no teams nod and gdi together.. there is no merging.. doesnt make any sense then game is about merging together as one but on muliplayer your seperated this is garbage i wish i can sell my digtial copy for 5 bucks too many bugs dont buy stay away another game EA messed up i hate EA. Expand
  93. 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
  94. 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
  95. ThomasS.
    Mar 27, 2010
    2
    This game should have been sold as a Total Annihilation game. It is not C&C. It's not worth $49.95 and definitely not worth
  96. ThirlW
    Mar 26, 2010
    1
    C&C game check. fun.... nope.. command point system: not as much fun as resource management.. crawler stance choice (IE offense, defense , support) fails to be anything but annoying solo game play: what a joke its bad enough to force us to log in to ea to play solo .. but the campaign almost forces you to play mulit player,,, epic fail end result last EA rts i buy with out a hard look..
  97. 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
  98. 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
  99. 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
  100. powL
    Mar 25, 2010
    8
    Arg! i thought here are "reviews" or "scores". seems that most ppl suck in being objective or something else. this game is very nice developed, easy to play and brings some fresh air into the mostly copy/paste rts genre. i like that this game isnt like the old formulas. if i wanna play the old ones...i can play the old games... i hate theses sequels where nearly nothing evolved. this is Arg! i thought here are "reviews" or "scores". seems that most ppl suck in being objective or something else. this game is very nice developed, easy to play and brings some fresh air into the mostly copy/paste rts genre. i like that this game isnt like the old formulas. if i wanna play the old ones...i can play the old games... i hate theses sequels where nearly nothing evolved. this is in my opinion the right direction for a command & conquer. take the game for what it is. and most ppl here do have no idea what "gamedesign" really means i guess. they are just upset ... 8! clearly. Expand
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.