Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars

Command and Conquer has been an RTS milestone, still is, and I think it'll always be. It brings depth and infinite possibilities to the battles you can wage against multiple opponents with dozens of units, a nice building space and several creative superweapons to devastate your opponents. Plus in the PC, you can input army structure, army postures and positions, and the way they act to certain situations. Although because of all those things, Tiberium Wars can be slightly complicated, and so newcomers would have to delve deeply into strategies and commands before starting.

The campaign mode is quite enjoyable to play, with well-designed levels, cheesy but watchable cutscenes, and a few bonus objectives to kill some hours. The difficulty of them can be stressing at times, but it always keeps you striving at the correct pace. 9/10.

Skirmish is always something people love in RTS games, with you against an opponent or two, building bases, sending in huge armies, and just clashing to death. A great thing about playing against the computer is that you can change and modify their behaviour, like Rusher for waves of light, starting units or Tank for the more hardcore legions. Another interesting fact is the scope of the game. Most RTS games say "Build massive armies to conquer your opponents". Mostly they mean, small, little squadrons of units not massive, endless armies. But, with Tiberium Wars, you can literally build unlimited units, until your money runs out. 9/10.

A game for all RTS lovers, and fans of Command and Conquer.

Total Mark: 9/10

By HowlingRabbit334

I have thoroughly enjoyed nearly all of games in the Command and Conquer series, and I am pleased to say that Command and Conquer 3 was everything that I had hoped. A return to the Tiberium universe, sweet graphics, and of course, the fun and campy Full Motion Videos (FMVs). As this is IMDb, and not a games website like Gamespot, I will focus much of my review on the FMVs.

Cheesy is the key word that sums up the FMVs. But it's cheesy in a good way. There is some really good B-movie talent to ham it up, including Michale Ironside (Sam Fisher!), Josh Holloway (Sawyer from Lost!), and Billy Dee Williams (Lando!). Williams is really a sight to see as he overacts his way through the GDI FMVs as the sleazy GDI Director Redmond Boyle. Shannon Cook, John Huck, and Shauntay Hinton serve their roles as faux reporters quite well. Grace Park and Tricia Helfer from Battlestar Gallactica along with Jennifer Morrison from House add some much-needed female presence to an otherwise all-male cast. Of course, Joe Kucan's performance as the evil, sneering bald man Kane really took the cake. One thing I really relished was the use of jerky camera effects which gave a sort of "you are there" feel.

A lot of people out there seem to be against the game simply because it was made by EA. Well, that is a shame, since the game and its FMVs are good in their own right!

The twist in this series was intriguing but they could have gone further. Can't say much without this being a spoiler but it still was a pleasing time playing this game and reconnecting with the characters such as Kane

Hands down one of the best Real Time Strategy games ever. The graphics is really great the details are stunning and so is the model design ! But the physics engine could be a bit better !

The rating could be said to be a bit prejudiced as I am head over heals in love with the C&C franchise especially the ones involving GDA and NOD !But you are lying to yourself if you give this game anything less than an 8.

It has awesome background story and the scenarios you face in the campaign are pretty amazing too . The NOD and GDA individual campaigns are worth the time and effort because of the scenarios which give you individual view points of the organizations. The game just gives you specific objectives to fulfill in campaigns. Use your wits and stratagem to beat the game !

...only with todays technology.

I'm sorry, but i have to disagree with the first user-comment for EAs newest RTS, a follow-up to Westwoods "Tiberium conflict" and "Tiberian sun". To kill two birds with a stone, i also wholeheartedly disagree with all the nay-sayers. I tried to swallow all the criticisms I've read throughout, but since this is the only voice currently here, furthermore a negative one, i *have* to throw in my two cents.

Im a die-hard fan of the Red Alert series portion of CnC, especially the sequel. I've tried both "normal" CnCs, but while i appreciated the game's main idea, Soviet vs. Allies was a much cooler conflict to play for my tastes. Also, i was never big on Sci-Fi, except only a handful of games and films. So while all the hype-machinery was started for TW, i couldn't see why everyone was so hot for this game. I thought akin to many skeptics, that its same ol same ol anyway, except for improved graphics and fin. But then i laid my hands on the demo, just for fun, and in that instant moment, i was hooked. Even with my merely biting in the predecessors, it just poured the CnC-feeling from every pore: The sidebar, the cheesy movies, the terrific unit and building-design, the uncompromising mix of fast action and room for tactics, the drill of the briefings, the devastating effects, animation, sound-design etc. I absolutely fell in love with the game and got it right away. And even though its German dubbed, which is, at most times, a serious atmosphere-killer, it didn't disappoint. Though let me note, I'm only talking about the campaign! I don't want to jump to conclusions for the skirmish and multi-player modes when I'm not playing them- What more evidence can one give than after all new RTSes I've played (AoE 3, Supreme Commander, thousands of WW-games ie.) only this could grab me by the throat? Heck, even Generals left me cold (Though after this i think i might give it a third go)! So what makes this game so interesting for me? Well, first its the design, ranging from the menus, interface, cut-scenes, units and buildings, terrain etc. Its just millimeters away from perfect. Secondly, the story and missions, which are a blend of fast-paced destruction and strategical tiers- Which means, that in some missions the tactics are to omit any kind of tactics, which translates further into "Build fast and eradicate the enemy from the face of the earth", and in some there are multiple layers to complete a mission. And while some missions are a tad too easy (And others far too difficult), you'll always notice promptly when you made a mistake, like loosing units or structures after you didn't pay attention for a millisecond. The secondary objectives have their purpose as well, since at most times they ease the advancement (Albeit other times their only point of being is to prolong a mission, what should have been avoided)- And blimey, its just a heap of fun to slay the confronting party in effect-laden battles, while creating outposts, level up, gather resources and building huge bases. The presentation is only the glazing on the cake, with the Hi-Def videos loaded with stars, being less hilarious than the RA2 counterparts, or the aforementioned interface, that makes sure you're always in control of the battle, regardless of where you are on the map, or, the amazing music, atmosphere and so forth. Or did i mention the world map, whats also only a tool of immersion? (No, i didn't. But its adorable!) Simply, everything fits. And the one thing that *really* dragged me in: When i attacked a base during the campaign, the enemy's infantry seized buildings dynamically to my whereabouts- awesome (Even more that you can do the same, sometimes even with bonuses)!

Sure, it really tangles like you'd play the same game with modern looks all over again, hence all the outcries for innovations, but i say better master what you can do already right than innovate while no one cares (Maelstrom, anyone?) Now that they showed that they actually can develop a true CnC, they could show it *everyone* with RA3, though. For my part, they're in my heart again, after disasters as NFS Carbon, their general policy, and the Sport/Sims rehashes every goddamn year. I don't like em much either, but when someone gives a crap and develops such a crafty game, we should cut em some slack.

Bottom line: If you are a CnC fan, than read no further and buy it. If you dug the main idea of the games, but the old graphics put you off, do the same. Singleplayers can anticipate an atmospheric, fun campaign, with missions variantly short and long, multi-layered and straightforward, simple and challenging. Those who like it slow and tactical like Supreme Commander, Medieval 2, Company of Heroes and cant digest the idea of a fast, action-oriented oldschool game should stay with their favorites. But i still advise anyone to try out the demo, since thats exactly what you get, only tenfold.

(Thoughts about the first comment: EA *did* care. Thats why they've thrown Generals out of the window and brought back the original CnC. 3 generations of fans worked on this title. The interface is almost the same as in RA2. System specs are quite humane for todays standards- Just look at NFS Carbon for instance! Why isn't it properly finished? There were fan summits to get feedback- Why do you think did the critics and most fans like it? I mean, most people hate the title exactly for what you miss from it- Being CnC, almost completely unchanged.)

For me, it was like coming home.

(Sometimes it IS a tad too difficult, you're right- But thats better than unchallenging, generic games. Btw, im parallel in love with BfME right now).