facebook rss twitter

Review: Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars - PC

by Nick Haywood on 5 April 2007, 12:31

Tags: Electronic Arts (NASDAQ:EA), Strategy

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qaidv

Add to My Vault: x

Conclusion (and a word about the cast.)



So, is Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars worth splashing the cash on? The short answer is yes, but it does come with a couple of caveats that are worth remembering.

First, if you were expecting some new uber-all singing, ultra-cool RTS that blows everything else into the past, forget it. You’ll not find it here. Second, compared with other recent RTS titles, Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars sometimes feels like a step backward for the genre. There’s no armour or defence bonuses for terrain or position and no ground deformation of any sort. In fact, given Company of Heroes’ nearly entirely destructible maps, Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars feels like a highly polished update rather than a from-the-ground-up sequel. To be fair the game does take into account thinner rear armour and retreating as making you more vulnerable, but a key part of RTS titles is positioning your units for maximum effect balanced against survivability by using the terrain... which is what Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars lacks.

Well, just as you might find the gameplay less than groundbreaking, the fact that EA haven’t tried something new and have worked on improving, tweaking and polishing the C+C series leaves us with a game so smooth and shiny you could almost shave in it. The FMV sections aren’t the green screen back-dropped, low budget affairs from five years ago and the cast, though perhaps not the cream of the Hollywood A-list, are still well up to the job.

Click for larger image


Just as Clive Owen did a sterling job in Privateer all those years ago, EA are proving that getting hold of proper, experienced talent is essential if you want your FMV to work properly. Ironside, Williams and Kucan all play convincing if (especially in the case of Ironside) slightly stereotyped roles. The sexy Tricia Helfer and equally sexy Jennifer Morrison provide some welcome eye-candy as well as handling the majority of mission briefings. Oh, and let’s not forget the drop-dead gorgeous Grace Park, who incidentally starred in the recent Battlestar Galactica remake with Tricia Helfer, and is criminally under-used by EA here... but that’s just my personal opinion...

So out of the fairly crowded field of RTS titles, should you pick Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars? Well that purely depends on what you’re after from your game. Company of Heroes is probably the more accomplished game in terms of gameplay and mechanics but is far shorter. Dawn of War and Joint Task Force have bonuses due to terrain built in and Maelstrom has ground deformation and even player usable weather effects.

Click for larger image


All of which places the mighty Command and Conquer series very much in the ‘everyman’ area of RTS games. What Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars does it does very well, very well indeed but it’s hardly pushing the envelope. However, as a way of marking a return to the market after a too long absence, Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars is just about as perfectly formed as you could wish it to be and one that any RTS fan should definitely have on his shelf.

Pros
Small maps make for fast and frantic gameplay
Simple resource management lets you get on and wage war
Fair amount of difference between each faction’s units
FMV sections very well done
Highly polished and easy to get into
Works under Vista

Cons
Maps feel small compared to other RTS games
Limited and simplistic research tree
Limited scope for customizing units
HUD markers can take the fun out of exploring the maps
Units have mechanical ‘equal and opposite’ purposes

A welcome return of the Command Conquer series which couldn’t be more polished if you sprayed it with an entire can of Pledge

HEXUS Awards

HEXUS.gaming Recommended
Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars

HEXUS Right2Reply

HEXUS World Leading HEXUS Right2Reply initiative invites manufacturers, their representatives and vendors which supply HEXUS with products for technical editorial evaluation, to comment on the articles that we publish. If they choose to respond, we publish their response verbatim.



HEXUS Forums :: 9 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
The single player game is good, but the multiplayer is an absolute mess.

The EA forums is strewn with people having trouble getting online; crashes, connection errors and so forth. They'll be on their fourth patch within just over a week before long…

Not that I'm bitter, it's just when I buy a game and actually find a *little* bit of time to play it, I don't want to spend that time working out why it won't work.
I did find it odd that in the whole mock battle mentioned in the begining of the review with the waring factions of C&C and TA there was no mention of supreme commander although not a direct replacement of TA it was the bastard child , and that is not to say it is not an awseome game, but just as power hungry as TA was in it's day. In 5 years time when i have a computer powerful enough to play it i might go back and play it properly. C&C 3 should be a welcome release to the ultra intensive games of late that are a drain on systerm resources.
Hmm I'm going to have to disagree with you here (shock horror for me lol!) but I really love(d) C&C 3 as a game.

There have not been many RTS games over the past few years that have interested me; OK so I bought SupCom which is fun, but very slow and…big. It's almost a different genre entirely, and while fun, its alot of work to play properly.

C&C however is completely different, its fast, fun and doesn't require you to plan every single move to the letter - although crucially you CAN if you want to. You critisise it for not having the same depth of strategy as many recent games - but it does have this, its just not forced on you. If you want to you can just build 5 mammoth tanks or 20 aircraft and storm the enemy - and you will win 9/10 times. Or you could build some tanks, artillery and an infantry squad, and setup an ambush using the infantry as bait (great fun :D)..the strategy is there, you just have to choose to play it that way rather than taking the easy route.

Of course it's greatest strength is that its the most faithful new C&C game to the original yet, with its biggest problem being the interface (I miss the original Red Alert interface ;/ ) with everything feeling very ‘big’ (maybe thats SupComs fault), but you get used to this very quickly.

The multiplayer - well i've not had any problems with it, played multiple matches online without problems..but then its based on gamespy technology so I fully expect thousands of people to have problems with it (when will EA learn that gamespy is a terrible framework for online games?).

Oh and I should mention the graphics - despite being the same engine as generals it does look beautiful on max settings, and although I can't play it like that on this PC it still looks decent enough on medium graphics.

We don't really need groundbreaking RTS games - just good, solid implementations of current concepts, like this :)
Spud1
Of course it's greatest strength is that its the most faithful new C&C game to the original yet, with its biggest problem being the interface (I miss the original Red Alert interface ;/ ) with everything feeling very ‘big’ (maybe thats SupComs fault), but you get used to this very quickly.

Well again it's deliberately evoking the original C&C feel. C&C2 felt incredibly tiny to me, but C&C3 really does (in the demo) feel similar to playing the first C&C game all those years ago.
i felt the review was way to short and didnt really cover any of the multiplayer aspects, any chance of giving games a percentage as well ? or is there a particular reason why you dont ?