User Score
6.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 456 Ratings

User score distribution:
Buy On

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. Sep 28, 2014
    3
    So far removed from classics such as Red Alert and Red Alert 2 this game destroys the series mythos in favor of crazy units and far removed storyline.
  2. LászlóG.
    Nov 19, 2008
    4
    Nice graphics, and the co-op mode is a good shot, but after i mentioned this two new features, there is nothing new to say. No, really there is nothing to say, this game has nice graphics ( water), bad actors ( especially, the russian characters were poorly played.) and the possibility to call your friend to help you complete a mission.... by the way it takes only 4 hours ( cigarette and Nice graphics, and the co-op mode is a good shot, but after i mentioned this two new features, there is nothing new to say. No, really there is nothing to say, this game has nice graphics ( water), bad actors ( especially, the russian characters were poorly played.) and the possibility to call your friend to help you complete a mission.... by the way it takes only 4 hours ( cigarette and coffe breaks included) to finish the russian champaign on hard..... oh my god... couldn't you just resurrect the old C&C feeling? Expand
  3. Oct 7, 2010
    2
    The units are plastic toys. It's war for 4-8 year olds, really cute. Little tankies that talk to you. The warzone looks like it was designed by the team that also does Wallace & Gromit. No scary Yuri, but a lovely Japanese girl with VERY stylish hair. A real winner. Co-op is a brand new mode, which demonstrates to you how bad AI can be programmed. For 6-8 year olds, there is an ongoingThe units are plastic toys. It's war for 4-8 year olds, really cute. Little tankies that talk to you. The warzone looks like it was designed by the team that also does Wallace & Gromit. No scary Yuri, but a lovely Japanese girl with VERY stylish hair. A real winner. Co-op is a brand new mode, which demonstrates to you how bad AI can be programmed. For 6-8 year olds, there is an ongoing boobies show. Do yourself a favor and buy or download Red Alert 2. Or any other RTS, really. Expand
  4. BR
    Mar 17, 2009
    2
    Personally, I think red alert 2 graphics are better. Gameplay is weak and units are very limited. I'm very disappointed in this. I agree with one of the others reviewing this game, I would love a refund. The 10 dollars i spent on Red Alert 3 were not worth it.
  5. LysanderS
    Jan 2, 2010
    2
    The only tactic is zerging. The art of zerging is a tricky business. It onvolves quickly capping a resource point, then spamming top tier units out as quickly as possible to march on the enemy base. By tricky, "i mean what the hell, are there even any tactics here?!" If you want some nice tactics, gorgeous graphics and a load of fun, i suggest you look elsewhere, specifically Company of The only tactic is zerging. The art of zerging is a tricky business. It onvolves quickly capping a resource point, then spamming top tier units out as quickly as possible to march on the enemy base. By tricky, "i mean what the hell, are there even any tactics here?!" If you want some nice tactics, gorgeous graphics and a load of fun, i suggest you look elsewhere, specifically Company of Heroes. If you want...i don't know what the hell this game offers...boring, repetitive gameplay, ugly graphics...then you came to the right place. While other games use gameplay to catch gamers' attention, this game uses skimpily girls and terrible voice acting. So, so cheesy. Do not buy this "game". Expand
  6. King
    Dec 16, 2008
    1
    I had high hopes for this game, and they were dashed soundly. While playing this game it is painfull obvious they spent all of their budget on the women they included. Gameplay is awful, and using your units to their full potential is irrelevant. The game has the same overall flaw that I saw in CNC3, which is build up your base as fast as possible and spam the one kill-all unit. The I had high hopes for this game, and they were dashed soundly. While playing this game it is painfull obvious they spent all of their budget on the women they included. Gameplay is awful, and using your units to their full potential is irrelevant. The game has the same overall flaw that I saw in CNC3, which is build up your base as fast as possible and spam the one kill-all unit. The enticing "Water Battles" they promised ruins the navy aspect, allowing most navy units to drive on land and most land units to drive around seemlessly on water. This is an insult to the gaming community, driven by EA's obvious lack of creativity. Expand
  7. EricO
    Jan 18, 2010
    4
    Just a really bad RTS. The units are not fun to use, too complicated, or just badly designed. On top of that, basic elements of the interface that have been around in other RTS games to streamline control do not exist. For example, you can't deploy single units from a transport. You have to deploy all of them. Units that move from ground to air via special ability select with those Just a really bad RTS. The units are not fun to use, too complicated, or just badly designed. On top of that, basic elements of the interface that have been around in other RTS games to streamline control do not exist. For example, you can't deploy single units from a transport. You have to deploy all of them. Units that move from ground to air via special ability select with those on the ground when selecting all like units. There's also terrible AI even with your own units. Units with no defense will just sit there and get attacked instead of running away. And units with offense just out of range of say a tower, will sit there and die rather than moving automatically to engage the tower. It's such a bad game. I will never buy another command and conquer game after this. They've ruined it. Expand
  8. MikeG.
    Nov 25, 2008
    3
    Hmmm...where to begin. As a C&C fan of the older games, this version created by EA has me scratching my head in between imprinting keys on my forehead. It feels like it was an obligatory installment, and not something done well except hitting all of the right 'selling marks': Sex and RA. Just the fact that they made Tanya a blonde in this installment instead of a brunette like Hmmm...where to begin. As a C&C fan of the older games, this version created by EA has me scratching my head in between imprinting keys on my forehead. It feels like it was an obligatory installment, and not something done well except hitting all of the right 'selling marks': Sex and RA. Just the fact that they made Tanya a blonde in this installment instead of a brunette like in the previous two annoys me. Various plot flaws, including the presence of the chronosphere and lack of other chrono units annoys me. A lack of returning cast (General Carville, anyone?) hurts, but the current cast suffices, though the whole purpose of the female cast is to show as much as possible to the player, in terms of skin. Micromanagement of what little units there are can be frustrating in a large group of mixed units. a decided lack of a unit capable of ferrying land-locked vehicles across water without resorting to the massive plot-flaw that is the chronosphere extremely annoying. Ore collecting is a joke, lacking any possibility of a renewable resource for those long boxing matches I used to savor with the opponent, which now is usually taken out by my computer counterpart from sheer unit-pumping ability. I now have an obnoxious computer that I must lead by the hand in particular missions, as well as lose opportunities in commandeering enemy structures because the computer's units are trigger happy. Once again, I feel like a great game is squandered to pay fanservice to the almighty console gamer, the complete lack of a PC-oriented game in a PC-based series. They don't even dignify the PC version by hosting it's own matchmaking service, instead relying on the horrid Gamespy service for multiplayer capabilities, whereas the console version merely uses it's own services. I remember a time when this series of games was exactly that: A series. Now, it feels like a game produced for the sake of it. Expand
  9. ChrisK
    Apr 3, 2009
    3
    Honestly, I was sorely disappointed in RA3. It felt like too much of a rehash - reusing the units with special abilities from C&C3 (and dumbing them down, presumably for the console releases), reusing the General abilities from C&C Generals (which were okay for that game, but seeing them again was NOT enjoyable), and throwing all of that together with the RA storyline... well, overall I Honestly, I was sorely disappointed in RA3. It felt like too much of a rehash - reusing the units with special abilities from C&C3 (and dumbing them down, presumably for the console releases), reusing the General abilities from C&C Generals (which were okay for that game, but seeing them again was NOT enjoyable), and throwing all of that together with the RA storyline... well, overall I just didn't like this game. It doesn't help that the much touted "Cooperative play" feature feels more like a "Way too ****ing easymode," and I was playing on Normal. :I But then, when your AI buddy is spamming the enemy with near infinite resources worth of units, well. Give it a pass if you want an RTS that's actually somewhat challenging. If you want one that plays like cheats are always enabled, this'd be the game for you. Expand
  10. Jun 19, 2011
    4
    The game is good, and has humour. But it's nothing like the old RA games from Westwood. If you enjoyed those games, and think about buying this, you really should see videos first. As stated by others, it's more comical (With the graphics), has more loose humour, and alot of eye candy, which personally in my opinion is just to attract young teenagers into buying the game. One thing IThe game is good, and has humour. But it's nothing like the old RA games from Westwood. If you enjoyed those games, and think about buying this, you really should see videos first. As stated by others, it's more comical (With the graphics), has more loose humour, and alot of eye candy, which personally in my opinion is just to attract young teenagers into buying the game. One thing I noticed when I played, was that the troops in the game (like a conscript), when killed, the corpse will remain on the ground for quite abit unlike other games. The bodies can even be flinged or moved around after the unit/s die. I was annoyed that there wasn't a map generator in it like the previous RA games. Luckily, the nets provided a map generator mod for the game. I would not recommend this game more than the old games. Nothing will ever beat the old Westwood games. Expand
  11. Jan 1, 2012
    3
    EA tried to take the strenghs of this games predecessor to a new level, completely failed and ridiculed the complete franchise this way. A company like blizzard or valve would have simply thrown this into the garbage to not damage its reputation. Not only judged by its big name and the big expectations it could not life up to this game is simply just plain bad. Guess i never played a worseEA tried to take the strenghs of this games predecessor to a new level, completely failed and ridiculed the complete franchise this way. A company like blizzard or valve would have simply thrown this into the garbage to not damage its reputation. Not only judged by its big name and the big expectations it could not life up to this game is simply just plain bad. Guess i never played a worse rts before. Expand
  12. RoyW
    Jan 20, 2009
    0
    Bought this game on steam, so i couldn't "return" it. very disappointed in this game, it lacks in game play and graphics. Pros: The cut scene's are great, the girls are great. Cons: The game-play lacks badly, be first to build your base not so you can have an awesome killer army, but so you can get your special attacks then you can air-strike your enemy. This will wipe them out Bought this game on steam, so i couldn't "return" it. very disappointed in this game, it lacks in game play and graphics. Pros: The cut scene's are great, the girls are great. Cons: The game-play lacks badly, be first to build your base not so you can have an awesome killer army, but so you can get your special attacks then you can air-strike your enemy. This will wipe them out almost instantly and it's game over for them. This lacks having to use all of your army. Overall: I'd love my money back to buy anther game, really would. Expand
  13. Mar 26, 2011
    2
    The co-op mode probably is fun when you play with a friend. But its absolutely horrid when playing with the computer. The AI is awful. Apart from that i agree with people who consider it "dumbed down". I could survive the fact that apart from the co-op mode it does not offer anything new, but not in a situation when every mission gives you a feeling of deja vu. The units also aren'tThe co-op mode probably is fun when you play with a friend. But its absolutely horrid when playing with the computer. The AI is awful. Apart from that i agree with people who consider it "dumbed down". I could survive the fact that apart from the co-op mode it does not offer anything new, but not in a situation when every mission gives you a feeling of deja vu. The units also aren't particularly any fun, and all you have todo is master the strategy of building a huge army ASAP. The game might be OK if you have a mate to play it with, or if you hadn't had much experience with other RTS, but other thanthat - avoid it at all cost. Expand
  14. JohnS
    Jan 10, 2009
    4
    I have loved the C&C series, but ever since EA got a hold of it, it seems to be dying. While RA3 is probably EA's best C&C game, it still isn't that good. The new resource-gathering techniques make the gameplay slow, the units are extra expensive, extra buildings build MCVs, barracks and war factories buy extra upgrades to buy decent units. Games last far too long with the I have loved the C&C series, but ever since EA got a hold of it, it seems to be dying. While RA3 is probably EA's best C&C game, it still isn't that good. The new resource-gathering techniques make the gameplay slow, the units are extra expensive, extra buildings build MCVs, barracks and war factories buy extra upgrades to buy decent units. Games last far too long with the gameplay being far too slow. True, this game will probably be revived once some good mods come out for it, but I personally got bored with it just after days of playing it. Sure it has flashy graphics, but you won't be able to stand the gameplay for very long. Expand
  15. BrianC
    Nov 6, 2009
    1
    the game play is good, and the ability to play lan is awesome but the online is the worst in the world making me never want to play any gamespy game again!! would be a 8 if not for that.
  16. Johnw
    Jan 13, 2009
    1
    I cannot believe that they managed to ruin such a great franchise! -The graphics are awful, look old and are very confusing nad they are also TOO bright -The camera is TOO close to the ground -The units are like they came out of a stupid manga comic for 10 year old kids -You just place an ore refinery and that's it! No more resource strategies! -Limited Buildings, Units -Female I cannot believe that they managed to ruin such a great franchise! -The graphics are awful, look old and are very confusing nad they are also TOO bright -The camera is TOO close to the ground -The units are like they came out of a stupid manga comic for 10 year old kids -You just place an ore refinery and that's it! No more resource strategies! -Limited Buildings, Units -Female actors are like they are preparing for a porno film shoot. -Lack of many automatic defenses for your base -Units can walk on land and sea!! Just build anything you like! it can do anything!! No more strategy here as well -Finally the DRM thing... I miss the old WestWood Red Alert It was a classic, serious, true strategy game for all ages. Red Alert 3 is a shame for the strategy genre. Pity C&C 3 Tiberium Wars was much better and a more serious strategy game. Why did they destroy this one? Expand
  17. DuckO
    Aug 15, 2009
    0
    Max A took the words out of my mouth, a worthless piece of marketing driven mainstream shovelware that belongs in the dustbins of history. After Generals i thought the C&C franchies couldnt be ruined any further and that it hit its depts.. C&C3 got my hopes up a little.. but then RA3 came and raped my childhood memories.. Its like seeing sesame street being turned into a gorish snuff movie ffs!
  18. May 3, 2013
    0
    This an abysmal attempt to revitalize an RTS franchise perfected by Westwood Studios, but then absolutely destroyed by EA. This is Command and Conquer Red Alert 3 in a nutshell: Boobs, ass, explosions, Japanese school girls, and vodka. This honestly the most immature Installment to date. Red Alert 2 although having the same crude humor, was executed perfectly and had a sense of combatThis an abysmal attempt to revitalize an RTS franchise perfected by Westwood Studios, but then absolutely destroyed by EA. This is Command and Conquer Red Alert 3 in a nutshell: Boobs, ass, explosions, Japanese school girls, and vodka. This honestly the most immature Installment to date. Red Alert 2 although having the same crude humor, was executed perfectly and had a sense of combat etiquette and showed sexuality very subtly. The women in Red Alert 3 act like there about to film a porno, its pathetic and cringe worthy.

    Not the mention the game play. the emphasis on naval warfare is quickly overbalanced and does not perform any mechanical depth other than a means to escape an enemy. In Red alert 2 any body of water was both another battlefield and a barrier. it had an interesting dynamic that both the land an sea had to be conquered as a means to secure land troops across a body of water. in this game that strategy is gone, now anybody and their hydrophobic mother can swim across any body of water.

    Units are dwarfed and have micro-actions assign for each one of them. which is a nice touch but some units have useless micro actions, and some units micro actions are just basic functions that arnt really giving it much purpose. Not to mention the chaotic mess that is the skill tree. In the command and conquer series or in any other RTS, you must progress up a tech tree by building certain buildings to allow yourself to build stronger advanced units. But holy the untis in this game are backward an useless. the Apoc tank got a major nerf, tsunami tanks arent even tanks as they are just weaker version of the IFV. its a mess.

    Over all if u are a die hard CNC fan, dont be. EA had just announced the swan song and the funereal of a beloved franchise that stood for intense strategy, compelling story, cinematic excellence and strategic infrastructure. Command and Conquer is dead, and there is no turning from it.
    Expand
  19. IvanC
    Feb 20, 2009
    3
    The first Command and Conquer I didn't enjoy. I can't get into it. It's just not fun, I liked every iteration of this series and I love innovation. Ignoring the video clips which are on par with all the others in the series, the game mechanics don't feel right. I find myself playing this out of loyalty to the franchise (and to justify buying the game) but it lacks the The first Command and Conquer I didn't enjoy. I can't get into it. It's just not fun, I liked every iteration of this series and I love innovation. Ignoring the video clips which are on par with all the others in the series, the game mechanics don't feel right. I find myself playing this out of loyalty to the franchise (and to justify buying the game) but it lacks the magic of the previous versions. All units have two types of attack but the menu system is annoying. Some units are just plain novel and only used because they're all you have in the single player mode. I can't understand the high review scores, perhaps I'll play it again and change my mind, maybe I'm missing something. In the meantime I'll stick to the skirmishes in Tiberium Wars. Unforgivable taking away the ore/tiberium mining and replacing it with boring oil derek's. Good to see Mr Solo make a come back via the world of failed actors who end up in video games though. Expand
  20. Sep 4, 2013
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I need another brain, two extra hands and a microchip implanted to my spine to beat the AI in the harder difficulties of Skirmish. I'm not going to talk about the campaigns because I did not like them and they are too stupid to even deserve a negative comment. Expand
  21. BrianT
    Dec 10, 2009
    0
    They broke almost every mechanic that the game had going for it. Taking over a refinery with a harvester in it doesnt cap both. Single harvesters should be replaced by an oil well building instead, why even have a harvesting unit anymore? Tanks look like bobble heads and have stupid designs that no moron would use in war. Too bad they slutted the game up worse than a trailer park strip They broke almost every mechanic that the game had going for it. Taking over a refinery with a harvester in it doesnt cap both. Single harvesters should be replaced by an oil well building instead, why even have a harvesting unit anymore? Tanks look like bobble heads and have stupid designs that no moron would use in war. Too bad they slutted the game up worse than a trailer park strip club to seal the deal. Expand
  22. Jul 14, 2011
    0
    This is a terrible game. I have been a long standing C&C fan for 10+ years. I have logged over 100 hours playing the original Red Alert and hundreds of hours playing the other C&C titles. This game's Soviet and Allied campaigns are bareable at best. The Japanese campaign is horrific. The only thing that kept me playing was sheer determination to beat the game and be done with it. The onlyThis is a terrible game. I have been a long standing C&C fan for 10+ years. I have logged over 100 hours playing the original Red Alert and hundreds of hours playing the other C&C titles. This game's Soviet and Allied campaigns are bareable at best. The Japanese campaign is horrific. The only thing that kept me playing was sheer determination to beat the game and be done with it. The only upside was the obvious sexual appeal by the female actors. Although a lovely set of buxom breasts is a nice sight in a videogame, it is hardly able to overcome the glaring problems with army composition, unbalanced factions and the base units in general. They really scraped the bottom of the barrel to come up with these half-witted, futuristic clown cars. One thing the developers can't seem to understand is you don't need to make a rock-paper-scissors army strategy where it appears each unit was torn from the mind of a child watching a sci-fi movie. You just need to make classic, cool C&C tanks and supporting units and let us throw them at each other like the good old C&C games. Improve the graphics sure, make more levels great! But this new junk? They deserve to all be fired for going out this far on a limb just to pump out another title. For shame EA. For shame. Expand
  23. JulianAcosta
    Mar 1, 2009
    4
    I think its not like old red alert, EA make red alert to loose its real feel of playing. I can really make a difference between Westwood and EA, for me the best Red Alert was the first one. Red Alert 3 its joke for real command and conquer, it seems like EA didnt want expend much time so they make this red alert 3 really auwfull
  24. StevenBarna
    Oct 1, 2008
    3
    While they do have a good storyline (supposedly) EA has absolutely killed this game. Not only did they manage to make war all cartoonish, but now the units perform ridiculous functions, and the new fraction Empire of the Rising Sun? What a horrible name that is! Red Alert Fans worldwide beware, long gone is the glorious battleground brought to you by Westwood... all that's left is aWhile they do have a good storyline (supposedly) EA has absolutely killed this game. Not only did they manage to make war all cartoonish, but now the units perform ridiculous functions, and the new fraction Empire of the Rising Sun? What a horrible name that is! Red Alert Fans worldwide beware, long gone is the glorious battleground brought to you by Westwood... all that's left is a kiddie version that looks like it is shooting for a E 10 rating. Expand
  25. AdamP
    Nov 16, 2009
    2
    A horrible injustice of a game. It's an obvious show of cards on EA games releasing bright and flashy games. There are some good ideas, but every good idea is trumped with 3 bad ones.
  26. Zak
    Jan 19, 2009
    3
    They completely ruined it. The first Red Alert wasn't cartoony, silly, or remotely light hearted. It was a violent, scary portrayal of war, with gassing, bombing, and even a cinematic with Stalin being buried alive. EA shouldn't be trying to make the Red Alert series their funny line, they should get Westwood back and make some good games. Though the soundtrack was awesome.
  27. SuneB
    Jan 3, 2010
    1
    The game is a SCAM from if you buy it from steam, they do not have Serial keys for it so you are not able to play it online. No fix has been made for a long time, i want a refund.
  28. PhilH
    Nov 7, 2008
    3
    I'm absolutely shocked by the scores supposedly professional reviewers gave this game. In all honesty I think it has to rate as one of the worst RTS games of recent years, it's staggeringly poor. Maybe if games like Company of Heroes, World In Conflict, Supreme Commander and Dawn of War didn't exist it'd be able to call itself average, but honestly I can't think I'm absolutely shocked by the scores supposedly professional reviewers gave this game. In all honesty I think it has to rate as one of the worst RTS games of recent years, it's staggeringly poor. Maybe if games like Company of Heroes, World In Conflict, Supreme Commander and Dawn of War didn't exist it'd be able to call itself average, but honestly I can't think of a more infantile, braindead, cheesy game in its genre. The graphics are reasonably well presented, but the artistic concept is like something out of a bad cartoon as the art team do their best to emulate the look of Starcraft and fail. The units are uniformly stupid and inconsistent, the interface is immensely dated, the maps are poor and small. I mean take away the shiny graphics and it'd struggle to be better than the original. It's like a decade of innovation in the genre never happened. I got this game for free through work and I still felt cheated. Free is too expensive. Expand
  29. aaronh
    Jul 20, 2009
    3
    Red alert 2 was really good, it had a simple gameplay, low graphics for your average computer at the time to take, and somewhat realistic units, some a little futuristic, but not over the top. in comparison, this game takes up a ton of graphics, looks (in my opinion) too cartoon-ish. yes i know thats what they go for, but i still think that tiberium wars type graphics/units would get a Red alert 2 was really good, it had a simple gameplay, low graphics for your average computer at the time to take, and somewhat realistic units, some a little futuristic, but not over the top. in comparison, this game takes up a ton of graphics, looks (in my opinion) too cartoon-ish. yes i know thats what they go for, but i still think that tiberium wars type graphics/units would get a much better score from players. in my opinion, the only good thing about this game is the cinematics and co-op. (i am not slamming the c&c series however, this is the first "bad" game so far). Expand
  30. MaxA
    May 18, 2009
    0
    I cannot believe they killed the series with this game. Mark J hit the nail on the head when he spoke of the original Command & Conquers. RT, Ian, James, you guys have absolutely no idea what an RTS is. Now, all the C&C series is about how many hot chicks they can slap up on the game with ridiculous FMVs and a plot that makes absolutely no sense nor is it actually fun to play. The I cannot believe they killed the series with this game. Mark J hit the nail on the head when he spoke of the original Command & Conquers. RT, Ian, James, you guys have absolutely no idea what an RTS is. Now, all the C&C series is about how many hot chicks they can slap up on the game with ridiculous FMVs and a plot that makes absolutely no sense nor is it actually fun to play. The graphics are not impressing at all. For crying out loud, Starcraft (the first) looks better and more realistic, and Im not even going to mention how much better the plot is. Adding a new commander does not help at all in gameplay. It just angers me because there's a dimwit who makes childish remarks and acts like a total retard "trying" to help me. I never asked for help playing C&C. So what gives? Anyway, 3rd game in the series and it seems more and more as if it's losing the strategy part of it. A lot of people have been bedazzled by "new" units and a new side but its nowhere near enough to make up for the pure garbage that the game is. The Apocalypse tank...wow, what happened? Honestly...what happened? Ore wells!? Since when??? You can call RA3 an RTS if by that you mean Real Time Spamming because honestly that's all that you have or can do. Now it's all about who can build the fastest and launch the biggest wave of units OR you can wait to get a superweapon and just let that do all the work for you and pretend that you played a strategy game. I played this game for a few days and hated myself for it. I have been with C&C since the beginning but never again will I buy another C&C game. Fellas, this is as far as I go. I can only go so far and so low. If you want to play a REAL RTS, pick up Company of Heroes, the Dawn of War series, or Supreme Commander. Only get this if you want soft-core porn and some mild humor from some bad actors. The only thing this games is going to be dominating is the trash bin, where it belongs. Expand
  31. RalphW.
    Nov 13, 2008
    4
    Being a big Red Alert 2 fan I am very disappointed. The graphics are hard to decipher it is unclear from visual examination what the units do. The whole base building side is a joke - just place an ore refinery infront of the ore - boring. I miss my Russian tanks etc - I was really looking forward to this game but I doubt I will play it at all - feel cheated - especially after reading the Being a big Red Alert 2 fan I am very disappointed. The graphics are hard to decipher it is unclear from visual examination what the units do. The whole base building side is a joke - just place an ore refinery infront of the ore - boring. I miss my Russian tanks etc - I was really looking forward to this game but I doubt I will play it at all - feel cheated - especially after reading the glowing reviews. Expand
  32. TimB
    Nov 19, 2008
    2
    Abysmal AI. Resource collection (a key part of RA) is nearly non-existent. They seemed to spend more on boobs than they did on the AI and gameplay.
  33. Jul 29, 2013
    0
    An absolute insult to what red alert stood for. EA thinks the community want hollywood actors rather than good gameplay. The game is not enjoyable and dubbed down. Play Red Alert 2 a real game instead
  34. May 23, 2012
    0
    I loved all C&C games! My favourite is Tiberian Wars. Even Tiberian sun is more fun than this game. Its just cheap, theres no coolness faktor, its boring. Today I gave it a new Chance, but I played it only for 5 Minutes. So Red Alert 2 would be a better choice!
  35. DerekT
    Jan 7, 2009
    4
    I was a huge fan of RA2 back in the good Westwood days. It really sucks that EA managed to get their hands on such a gem of a game, because honestly I think they spend too much effort on the 'Live action movies' which are all basicly pro american soft-core porn vids of busty women hanging around generals and marines. If you were a Red Alert fan like I was I would not suggest I was a huge fan of RA2 back in the good Westwood days. It really sucks that EA managed to get their hands on such a gem of a game, because honestly I think they spend too much effort on the 'Live action movies' which are all basicly pro american soft-core porn vids of busty women hanging around generals and marines. If you were a Red Alert fan like I was I would not suggest buying this game. It looks and feels slightly the same but really lacks actual effort being put into it. It's just dumbed down too far for kids. Expand
  36. CBCB
    Nov 16, 2008
    3
    Red Alert 3 is a bastardized, arcade version of the classic RTS genre. It is an exercise in monetizing the franchise by EA and a way to boost their stock price. If you are not already a Red Alert fanatic, you'll likely rate this game a 40% (no grade inflation). The graphics are updated and look very good. There are a lot of vividly animated and colored units with the usual funny Red Alert 3 is a bastardized, arcade version of the classic RTS genre. It is an exercise in monetizing the franchise by EA and a way to boost their stock price. If you are not already a Red Alert fanatic, you'll likely rate this game a 40% (no grade inflation). The graphics are updated and look very good. There are a lot of vividly animated and colored units with the usual funny voices. A lot of people are up in arms about the cut scenes - when regarded in that light, Red Alert 3 is more of an interactive third tier movie. For $10 you can do much better in a movie theater (or for much less if you use Netflix like I do). The strategy part of the game, i.e. its core, is flawed. I personally hated the protocol concept. Basically you can have an enemy that is defeated, down to his last building and out of money and units, yet he can still control a series of devastating attacks that will savage your base and army. It is just silly. One of the interesting aspects of traditional RTS is that they combine resource management with the army build-up and the actual combat. Once you remove a big portion of your damage generation from the economic supply chain the game becomes just a silly arcade. Play whac-a-mole with your opponent's army using a silly set of tools like the magnetic satellite that pulls entire ships into outer space. And do that all for free... Basically the entire balance of power can be switched around with a few lucky deployments of the other guy's protocols particularly on larger maps. The protocols are overpowered and especially as they do not cost anything they ruin the strategic element of the game. Expand
  37. M.Alex
    Jan 21, 2009
    4
    Unfortunatly, I'm very disappointed by this game. I'm primarily a single-player person, and the co-op doesn't entice me at all, and playing with a AI commander is incredibly irritating. I really loved C&C3, which was a good step after the horrid Generals, but in this part of the franchise EA managed to loose the plot again. Shame.
  38. Jul 2, 2012
    3
    GOD, please look after the future of C&C. I do not think that it is capable in the corrupt hands of the greedy.
    I'm not a religious man by any means, but I do not have any faith in the EA handling of the C&C universe. Since Red Alert 2, each subsequent release from EA LA has buried this once glorious game deeper, and deeper, deeper still in EA's own septic waste. C&C3 was a step in the
    GOD, please look after the future of C&C. I do not think that it is capable in the corrupt hands of the greedy.
    I'm not a religious man by any means, but I do not have any faith in the EA handling of the C&C universe. Since Red Alert 2, each subsequent release from EA LA has buried this once glorious game deeper, and deeper, deeper still in EA's own septic waste. C&C3 was a step in the right direction. C&C:RA3 however proves how out of touch EA really is. The once solid design, mechanics & love implemented by Westwood has been replaced with **** arrogant design, heavily sedated and influenced by other game universes, manga, and comic books. You would be forgiven if you thought this would improve the game formula. Sadly it does not. Co-op is a feature implemented during a period of 'every-game-must-have-co-op' madness at EA. EA have thrown money into the cast rather than the game and is marketing sex appeal and fantasy rather than science fiction. The result is a game which is prehistoric before it ever launched. Too many 'new' features to entice customers. New feature this, new feature that, battlecast, **** and ass, stereotypes that will bore the balls off you.

    The game has some nice tech, and they have obviously tried hard to bring back the cut-scenes story arc to submerse the gamer. But the direction is just abysmal, and the story is a lame duck that couldn't hatch a fart without popping a blood vessel in it's eye.

    My gut feeling is that RA2 (and just barely C&C3) are the last straws in what was once a very enjoyable universe that will be remembered fondly until EA gets it's s**t together and stops leaving the design in the hands of an 8 year old.
    Expand
  39. May 8, 2013
    2
    I was in shock about this game. I bought the complete C&C collection and love all the other ones, but this one is just a horrid abortion of the game series. I know Red Alert is a very goofy game its pretty obvious. But just 10 mins into the game i started realizing how far they had taken it with this game, and it was obvious they had knocked it down to a level of simplicity that i couldI was in shock about this game. I bought the complete C&C collection and love all the other ones, but this one is just a horrid abortion of the game series. I know Red Alert is a very goofy game its pretty obvious. But just 10 mins into the game i started realizing how far they had taken it with this game, and it was obvious they had knocked it down to a level of simplicity that i could just not cope with.
    The graphics are not even that redeeming even on ultra it looks like im playing a cartoon-ish web browser game and the recycled audio with the time tested lines was just too much for me at that point.
    Im just glad i never bought this game at full retail price and really just paid around a dollar and some change for it.

    Bottom line? Not even worth the one buck i spent on it. God have mercy on the developers souls for this abortion of a C&C game.
    Expand
  40. Apr 28, 2013
    0
    This is the wrs Command & Conquer game ever made! The graphics looks like cartoons exept from the water wich is nice. The campaign is boring. They totally ruined the Red Alert Series with this game. Wase f time and waste of money!
  41. JakeS.
    Nov 21, 2008
    3
    Someone else said that this game is only appealing to Red Alert fans. I am in that category and I want to shoot whomever is responsible. Sadly, my wife gave it to me as a gift. She knows how much I loved RA2 and she was so happy to buy it for me. Now I have to pretend that I like it.
  42. BlamM.
    Nov 20, 2008
    1
    You must be kidding me! When is the press going to stop kissing EA's butt. Any other company puts a game this stale out and they would get slammed. It's the same game we've all been playing since Command & Conquer 1 and that's just not acceptable.
  43. JoeM.
    Dec 8, 2008
    3
    I bought this game, only to take it back 24 hours later. The onlything interesting about this game is the coop. There are no unique units, no fun maps, the acting is terrible and quite frankly, its just an embarassment to EA games. I took a careful look at those who dared give this game anything higher than a 75 rating.
  44. Jun 11, 2012
    3
    EA has failed to appease its gamers they have defiled the c&c series and it saddens me, Red alert 3 was hyped up as being a true c&c game but failed to achieve this goal, it is not competitive the story is off track.... And no Ore really wtf EA seriously go lay in a pit forever.
  45. JH
    Nov 18, 2008
    3
    The AI is abysmal in the campaign (friendly AI keeps dying), and in skirmishes (rushes early in the game, then is easily decimated if you survive the one-time rush). The game is RA2 on speed... everything needs to be micromanaged and done at extreme speeds or you will be raped. It honestly feels like RA2 reboxed with some new units and graphics. EA has yet again shown its abilities of The AI is abysmal in the campaign (friendly AI keeps dying), and in skirmishes (rushes early in the game, then is easily decimated if you survive the one-time rush). The game is RA2 on speed... everything needs to be micromanaged and done at extreme speeds or you will be raped. It honestly feels like RA2 reboxed with some new units and graphics. EA has yet again shown its abilities of taking an existing game and re-releasing with ass gameplay and buggy AI. Expand
  46. Dec 21, 2012
    0
    This game is a big disappointment to fans of the original Command & Conquer series like me. I am very curious why the critics have rated it so much higher than the actual players - there must be some way in which EA are influencing reviews. I got so bored trying to play it that I cannot be bothered to even try to finish any of the three fractions. There is too much tedious micromanagementThis game is a big disappointment to fans of the original Command & Conquer series like me. I am very curious why the critics have rated it so much higher than the actual players - there must be some way in which EA are influencing reviews. I got so bored trying to play it that I cannot be bothered to even try to finish any of the three fractions. There is too much tedious micromanagement (what was wrong with the simple double-click to guard/patrol approach?) It seems that EA are buying up quality titles and then dumbing them down for console players, who must think this is great, and it probably is, compared to the even worse rubbish that they are used to playing. Expand
  47. Apr 15, 2012
    0
    EA of **** Always **** titles.. they killed westwood, they killed the best RTS series: C&C Red Alert!! (and KKND)!! Total crap! If I take the **** and put it in my CD player maybe the game would be better.
    I hate you EA, die in hell! f**k
  48. Jul 29, 2013
    4
    Frankly, i was fed up with RTS games back in 2000, after seeing C&C, Red Alert, Age of Empires, Starcraft, Empire Earth and many other games in the genre. Yet they just keep repeating themselves over and over. Again it's soviets vs the US and another idiotic scenario. Sure, there are some additions, some new features and mechanics, but overall there is not much new. After seeing the demoFrankly, i was fed up with RTS games back in 2000, after seeing C&C, Red Alert, Age of Empires, Starcraft, Empire Earth and many other games in the genre. Yet they just keep repeating themselves over and over. Again it's soviets vs the US and another idiotic scenario. Sure, there are some additions, some new features and mechanics, but overall there is not much new. After seeing the demo on Steam, I surely won't buy it. Expand
  49. Jul 14, 2012
    0
    This... this is a mess. I played the demo and really thought this would be a good game. I was wrong, I was WRONG. I got five missions in and realized I had no idea what's going on or how to play. The story is an absolute travesty. The cut scenes are basically there so you can go get a beer before the next mission. If there's a war going on I'd like to know just what the heck we're doing toThis... this is a mess. I played the demo and really thought this would be a good game. I was wrong, I was WRONG. I got five missions in and realized I had no idea what's going on or how to play. The story is an absolute travesty. The cut scenes are basically there so you can go get a beer before the next mission. If there's a war going on I'd like to know just what the heck we're doing to win it. It sure doesn't seem like a war is going on. The units all feel like toys or cartoons, everything feels borderline racist, and you think that might come out really well at first, but it ends up being dopey. They "blended naval combat seamlessly into the game" by making it hardly distinguishable from land combat. It feels like everyone's got little rafts. The maps are claustrophobic, water does not act as any sort of distinguishable barrier, its not clear what units can move across water and which can't, the unit abilities are unfocused and take two brains and three hands for a human player to use, and the Russian commando unit is a girl. And, no, its not cool to command an army of trained bears. They die really really fast and you lose. The blimps are tiny, the resource gathering mechanic feels mindless and tacked on,everything about the aircraft is annoying and worst of all the companion AI's are just an awful addition. They take up your resources and fight your battles for you. That may sound okay, but trust me, you don't know how much you enjoyed being in control of your own forces until half of them are at the AIs disposal. You don't decide when and where to crush the enemy, he does. The best thing you companion can possibly do is die. The happiest thing that ever happened to me in a mission was seeing my companion die and taking over his resources.

    I cannot tell you how much I loved Red Alert 2. It was my first RTS. I played every C&C game after that. Even the really old kinda crappy ones. After Tiberium Wars, I was optimistic. I thought maybe EA would not take a crap all over the C&C franchise, I thought things might work out. I was WRONG. I honestly can't think of anything good to say about this game. I liked part of the opening. I didn't like it enough to give it a "1" but hey that's something I guess.
    Expand
  50. Jan 1, 2014
    2
    I loved RA2...but this game is pretty awful. The campaign hand holds you to the point of boredom. Acting is well...not good, but you expect that from C&C.

    In versus mode, it's beyond boring. You rush to get a special power like a psionic detonator, let it charge and then just obliterate the enemy base. Your units aren't that useful in the end. I'll take another helping of AOE1 please:
    I loved RA2...but this game is pretty awful. The campaign hand holds you to the point of boredom. Acting is well...not good, but you expect that from C&C.

    In versus mode, it's beyond boring. You rush to get a special power like a psionic detonator, let it charge and then just obliterate the enemy base. Your units aren't that useful in the end. I'll take another helping of AOE1 please: at least that game was fun, despite being archaic. This game FEELS archaic and isn't fun.
    Expand
  51. Aug 15, 2012
    2
    A disappointment for Command & Conquer fans, as EA steers the CnC franchise into the mainstream arcade area to pickup new customers. The game looks pretty, the cutscenes are true to the series, but for gameplay and every other aspect, I'll stick with older titles.
  52. Jun 10, 2014
    0
    Como jugador del Red Alert original sólo consiguió enfurecerme hasta cotas inauditas. Todo mal, historia, gráficos, intentos de humor fallidos, falta de interés en mecánicas. Dan ganas de mostrarlo a los estudiantes para que vean "lo que no hay que hacer".
  53. Sep 28, 2014
    0
    I am C&C fan from way back when Westwood had it, now i just feel dirty after playing it.

    1. The mythos is just not there, its like someone tried to copy C&C Red 2 and stopped before adding Yuri into it. 2.The combat is really bad. I like the combat from C&C Generals and almost ever C&C game before this one. 3.The unit design looks bad,it feels like a step back from C&C Generals. The
    I am C&C fan from way back when Westwood had it, now i just feel dirty after playing it.

    1. The mythos is just not there, its like someone tried to copy C&C Red 2 and stopped before adding Yuri into it.
    2.The combat is really bad. I like the combat from C&C Generals and almost ever C&C game before this one.
    3.The unit design looks bad,it feels like a step back from C&C Generals. The series is moving back instead of moving forward which seems to be absurd.
    Expand
  54. Jun 9, 2017
    4
    After a very enjoyable reply of StarCraft II I gave C&C RA II another chance and was just as disappointed the second time. Many people wonder what happened to RTS games. All they need to do is play this camping garbage to understand. The solo mission are just terrible with no choice. You have to do exactly what the game wants at the start of every mission. The invisible walls thatAfter a very enjoyable reply of StarCraft II I gave C&C RA II another chance and was just as disappointed the second time. Many people wonder what happened to RTS games. All they need to do is play this camping garbage to understand. The solo mission are just terrible with no choice. You have to do exactly what the game wants at the start of every mission. The invisible walls that this game has and that SCII does not is why the studio was scrapped and RTS is at an all time low. Learn from their bad example! Expand
Metascore
82

Generally favorable reviews - based on 55 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 48 out of 55
  2. Negative: 0 out of 55
  1. PC Gamer
    92
    Any game in which a giant laser cannon pops out of Teddy Roosevelt's head on Mt. Rushmore is a winner in my book...Red Alert 3 is a highly polished game that doesn't take itself the least bit seriously, and co-op play might jus be the next big thing in RTS. [Holiday 2008, p.62]
  2. 80
    Red Alert 3 is by no means a bad addition to the Red Alert series, but compared to its forebears it lacks much of the panache the series held and may hold some disappointments for fans despite the addition of a good new faction and a fairly satisfying single-player experience.
  3. 80
    What was a tongue-in-cheek look at Cold War paranoia married to solid RTS gameplay has blossomed into a pure comedy that retains the easy-to-pick-up and addictive-as-peanuts gameplay of the best in the Command & Conquer franchise. It's not a game that will redefine strategy gaming, but it is one heck of an enjoyable ride.