Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight

 PC
User Score
2.1

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 714 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 75 out of 714
  2. Mixed: 45 out of 714
  3. Negative: 594 out of 714
Buy Now
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
view
per page
  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. 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
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. 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
  10. 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
  11. 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
  12. 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
  13. 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
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. 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
  17. 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..
  18. 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
  19. 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
  20. 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
  21. 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
  22. MikeT
    Mar 25, 2010
    3
    The one who decided starting a game at lowest settings 800*600 should have been sacked last year. A lot of the fire the game have for "less than adequate" graphics comes from this ****** up setting?!?! That aside, this isn't c&c at all. This game is like the movie Batman and Robin, a game that should never have existed at all. The next game should begin with Kane waking up from the The one who decided starting a game at lowest settings 800*600 should have been sacked last year. A lot of the fire the game have for "less than adequate" graphics comes from this ****** up setting?!?! That aside, this isn't c&c at all. This game is like the movie Batman and Robin, a game that should never have existed at all. The next game should begin with Kane waking up from the nightmare of c&c 4.… Expand
  23. KieronS
    Mar 25, 2010
    0
    I was a beta tester for this game, before the preorder's and open beta... I got in because I was one of the people who chose the subtitle. Well let me now state that my favorite part of this game IS the subtitle, as there is not much else to really like. C&C4 is a glorified capture the flag and does nothing for anyone who actually liked C&C to begin with. I played C&C from the start, I was a beta tester for this game, before the preorder's and open beta... I got in because I was one of the people who chose the subtitle. Well let me now state that my favorite part of this game IS the subtitle, as there is not much else to really like. C&C4 is a glorified capture the flag and does nothing for anyone who actually liked C&C to begin with. I played C&C from the start, and I say now with total certainty that this is no way to end it.This game is a horrible, shallow attempt at cloning concepts popular from DOW2 and similar titles. I will never legally purchase this game, not even if it was in the $5 bargin bin. I will always beleive the way C&C should have ended is with a time travel experiment to stop the tiberium in the first place, and thus stopping the scrin AND forming the Red Alert Universe. Which was the orignal ending planned. It is a shame that EA feels like it had to ruin such an awesome series with such a poorly done attempt to gain the users of DOW2.… Expand
  24. aidenz
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    even though i thought this game was being treated too harshly by the people giving it very low scores i have to agree with everything they say. as far as the game goes the new gameplay could have been an interesting experience (it's not an awefull concept) but the execution just isn't right it doesn't feel like a c&c game. de video's are horrible (even though before even though i thought this game was being treated too harshly by the people giving it very low scores i have to agree with everything they say. as far as the game goes the new gameplay could have been an interesting experience (it's not an awefull concept) but the execution just isn't right it doesn't feel like a c&c game. de video's are horrible (even though before they weren't the best ) i feel myself cringing at the horrible acting. as for the persistent internet connection just screws up the game for me because my internet connection just times out every once in a while and i lose all of the stuf i just worked my butt of to get. it's just not worth the money.… Expand
  25. AaronC.
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    Command and... Failure? The last three C&C games I played, all involved you, GDI or NOD, building your little base, and spamming out units to delightfully smash against each other until eventually you reached their base, destroyed it, and started another game. Oh, and you had to harvest these strange mutagenic crystals called tiberium for monies beacuse the countries could do cool things Command and... Failure? The last three C&C games I played, all involved you, GDI or NOD, building your little base, and spamming out units to delightfully smash against each other until eventually you reached their base, destroyed it, and started another game. Oh, and you had to harvest these strange mutagenic crystals called tiberium for monies beacuse the countries could do cool things with them. It worked right? C&C 4 didn't think so. A complete changeup to the system, you now build this MCV (Crawler) through which you can unlimitedly spam units until you reach a unit cap, thus equalling an effective stalemate unless you're vastly superior to the other person, have team mates, or your enemy spends half the time picking their nose. It's boring and unimaginative, Whopee, Rocks Paper Scissors units. No tiberium harvesting, no base, spamtastic, stalemates, not very fun. I don't know *why* this game is even labeled as command and conquer. The story is also sub-par compared to the other C&C games, and tries way to hard to take itself seriously. There's no cute cheesy sci-fi fun. It's all gruff, boring, and blocky.… Expand
  26. LH
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    This game is terrible, no base building, poor graphics and boring gameplay. Such a shame as it ruined the end of the series. Do not waste your money, i wouldn't even waste bandwidth downloading a pirate of this.. I played the first few linear campaign maps, then a few skirmishes, felt so cheated that i returned the game for a refund, Ai seem to have no intelligence at all, that with This game is terrible, no base building, poor graphics and boring gameplay. Such a shame as it ruined the end of the series. Do not waste your money, i wouldn't even waste bandwidth downloading a pirate of this.. I played the first few linear campaign maps, then a few skirmishes, felt so cheated that i returned the game for a refund, Ai seem to have no intelligence at all, that with additional to numerous bugs makes this EA's worst game to date.… Expand
  27. C&C1fan
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    WOW way to kill C&C EA! Are you too ***** cheap to have a collectors edition and color manual... maybe a paper cover for the DVD case. The game-play is terrible and not a part of the RTS genre. Its more of a sub-play mode that focus on tactics and small groups of units. It's ALWAYS fast paste with simple tactics and no real strategy. The combat looks like toy cars fighting one WOW way to kill C&C EA! Are you too ***** cheap to have a collectors edition and color manual... maybe a paper cover for the DVD case. The game-play is terrible and not a part of the RTS genre. Its more of a sub-play mode that focus on tactics and small groups of units. It's ALWAYS fast paste with simple tactics and no real strategy. The combat looks like toy cars fighting one another. A lot of the units feel the same, they have no individual kick. What happened to tiberium covering the world, why is tiberium chunks collected from platforms? EA took ideas from other games with no understanding as to how they work within their game mechanics and created this crap of game with C&C art. If I where to compare this game play as more like a Demigods game to supreme commander. The Missions are weak because of a lack of good story telling, EA really... 30 sec mission and character introductions? The leveling system is stupid for single player, missions are not designed around new abilities gained by the player because you can unlock units from multi-player and use them in any mission. Cant EA design missions that will teach us how to use each base type and unit formation? Both the managers and designers should be fired for this disgrace of a game! Maybe then they'll have some time to play a real RTS like Star Craft 2. I wish Blizzard had the IP for C&C. They would had talent and business sense to make a great game that sells because its great. NOT WORTH BUYING, I hope all the good designers in EA wont support this poor equal brand anymore and leave Electronic Junk!!! and let the manager and share holders who call the shots, drowning in this sinking ship. Stop buying and destroying good IP!… Expand
  28. SamM
    Mar 24, 2010
    1
    What is this? Another EA Mainstream game I see. Another EA FAILED game. Just like the battlefield series with BF:Hero's, EA is slamming C@C into the ground...No longer is there good RTS game play, good RTS base building...But more of a FPS/RTS mix. Is this even C@C anymore? Or is is some sick twisted hybrid game that came straight out of the laboratory from EA. This game flat out What is this? Another EA Mainstream game I see. Another EA FAILED game. Just like the battlefield series with BF:Hero's, EA is slamming C@C into the ground...No longer is there good RTS game play, good RTS base building...But more of a FPS/RTS mix. Is this even C@C anymore? Or is is some sick twisted hybrid game that came straight out of the laboratory from EA. This game flat out sucks, no true single player action, and no exciting game play.… Expand
  29. SeanW.
    Mar 24, 2010
    0
    I'll start this review off with a delve into the story of the game. For me, the story of the C&C (Tiberian Universe) has been one of the more involving and high draw factors for the series. Given that the acting tends to be on the soap opera side of the spectrum it would take a significant amount of effort from the developers to actually make me want to skip the cut scenes. Enter I'll start this review off with a delve into the story of the game. For me, the story of the C&C (Tiberian Universe) has been one of the more involving and high draw factors for the series. Given that the acting tends to be on the soap opera side of the spectrum it would take a significant amount of effort from the developers to actually make me want to skip the cut scenes. Enter Command And Conquer 4, stage left. In the previous title(s) C&C3 (and the expansion Kane's Wrath) the story arc builds towards a climax hinted at coming into it's full glory in the next (read: this) title. To be honest, NONE of the back story in the previous title(s) has ANYTHING to do with this game. At all. Where they could have picked up an actually interesting plot line and fleshed it out, building on and improving where it was leading towards, all that was accomplished was what seems like an afterthought to an already afterthought game. To say that this title makes the characters from the previous EA C&C amazingly enthralling and exciting is just an example of how horribly bad the writers did on this title. They dump you into the middle of a series of events that are NEVER EXPLAINED, offer you questions that shouldn't have even been introduced in the first place, and COMPLETELY REMOVE any tie-in to the previous title. This game was marketed, presented, and wrapped with a single message given to us, the gamers and loyal fans of the series: This is the endgame for the Tiberian story line. We did not need much in terms of story. Nor did we demand anything but at least meeting the bar set by the last title in the series RELEASED BY EA GAMES. This game is not a Command And Conquer title as I view them, and I can not rate it above a 0 for the absolute failure on EA's part to even remotely represent the spirit of the franchise. Come on EA.… Expand
  30. MarcusA
    Mar 23, 2010
    0
    Managed to fail at everything the previous games were loved for. Besides being a mediocre looking game, it's mechanics are mostly disappointing. Looks like someone made a bad game, then slapped C&C on the front cover so that it would sell. Never have I felt as cheated off my money as I feel now. Ruined what should have been great. This is Command and Conquer in nothing but name.
Page:

Awards & Rankings

19
#19 Most Discussed PC Game of 2010
10
#10 Most Shared PC Game of 2010

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
64

Mixed or average reviews - based on 71 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 16 out of 71
  2. Mixed: 44 out of 71
  3. Negative: 11 out of 71
  1. Eurogamer
    60
    It's nothing at all like Command & Conquer, but - eventually - it's a thoughtful and bombastic multiplayer RTS that's welcoming to everyone.
    Read full review
  2. GameSpot
    70
    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.
    Read full review
  3. Play.tm
    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.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »