Metascore
72

Mixed or average reviews - based on 15 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 15
  2. Negative: 1 out of 15
  1. Based on longevity, this would receive about 500/10. [Issue#52, p.105]
User Score
6.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 11 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 2
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 2
  3. Negative: 1 out of 2
  1. JohnS
    Sep 18, 2009
    4
    New units were unbalanced. Story was the worst of any Command and Conquer game available. (Atleast Generals had one) Many of the missions New units were unbalanced. Story was the worst of any Command and Conquer game available. (Atleast Generals had one) Many of the missions were very unbalanced as the AI preferred to use mostly one unit. AKA Attack Dogs, Desolaters or Samurai Archers. The music was still not as good as Red Alert 2. 37 Out of 100 at the most. Full Review »
  2. Feb 18, 2012
    10
    Well worth the download.My total play time 26 hours 100% completion.Story does not matter so much the challengers keep you coming back to tryWell worth the download.My total play time 26 hours 100% completion.Story does not matter so much the challengers keep you coming back to try beat your times.13 Main missions and 37 side missions lots of content for you cash...unlocking more powerful units as you go along seemed to work well.

    Negatives are no multi player not even skirmish would have been nice to try out the new units against a friend.Also missing co op play! if the developers of the new Generals game thats rumoured to be hitting the xbox in the near future read this please include co op... me and my cousin loved that in red alert 3! was cool.

    Would have Preferred Gemma Atkinson to be back but im guessing they could not afford her for this ;)
    Full Review »