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. Nathuram
    Apr 25, 2011
    3
    It was brave of them to take an established money making franchise and flip the whole thing like a pancake. Not many companies have the balls to do that. Too bad the end result was a game that had nothing to do with C&C gameplay and made for a completely undesirable game
  2. Erathil
    May 16, 2011
    1
    This game is mournful. As of the time of this writing, it's available from Steam for twenty dollars. I passed C&C4 by when it came out last year, wary from the reviews and videos I had seen, and only picked it up now while the RTS genre is fairly dry.

    It is absolutely not worth it. If this game were being given away it would still cost too much in hard-drive space alone to justify    This game is mournful. As of the time of this writing, it's available from Steam for twenty dollars. I passed C&C4 by when it came out last year, wary from the reviews and videos I had seen, and only picked it up now while the RTS genre is fairly dry.

    It is absolutely not worth it. If this game were being given away it would still cost too much in hard-drive space alone to justify owning it. This is the worst RTS I can remember owning in over a decade. It is a betrayal, a betrayal of the franchise, of the fans, and of EA's customers in general.

    The Command and Conquer franchise has always had some common traits constant between all its games, from the original to the Red Alert series and even the short-lived Generals spin off. You build a base, you build structures along a tech-tree, you unlock more advanced units by building the corresponding buildings, you amass a force free of any arbitrary population cap, and you wage quick, brutal, and often unforgiving war. Command and Conquer 4 has none of that. Not a single defining point of the franchise is present. Not. A. One. Resource gathering is gone. Base building is replaced by a single 'crawler' mobile facility that builds all available units once its deployed. Your army is limited by an infuriatingly low population cap since actual units are produced without any sort of resource cost. The closest thing to a tech-tree is a list of upgrades you can purchase at your crawler if you capture special tiberium crystals and return them to your base, almost like a capture the flag mini-game. Since there are no bases and units (including the crawlers) are produced neigh instantly and freely, victory depends on capture points which are won over by standing near them until a sliding bar swings to your faction. The only analogue I can think of is a rather despised mechanic Blizzard has incorporated into one of its World of Warcraft multiplayer battlegrounds. Indeed, the entire affair feels more like haphazardly managing an MMO than playing an actual real time strategy game. The more I think of it, the more like an MMO this game feels. The campaign is available in single-player but its clearly balanced around a poorly implemented co-op approach, to the extent that you can't start a mission without being put into a chat-room of C&C4 players. Most disturbingly, you'll see people advertise games to grind experience in these channels, since higher tech-units are now dependent on experienced gathered from your playing account. You have to grind experience to build units. Let that sink in. It is exactly as awful as it sounds. Its myriad technical and mechanical problems aside, what I object to the most is its presentation. I was replaying C&C 3 out of nostalgia before I decided to buy this game, and I firmly believe C&C 3 had better graphics, despite coming out four years before hand. C&C4 may have higher polygon counts and better lighting, but there was a baffling aesthetic change in the transition that makes everything look like building blocks. Gone are the sleek and hard lines, the fascinating alien bio-mechanical fusion, the gleam of light off tanks, and any sort of attempt at a realistic presentation. Now every unit looks like a child cobbled it together out of building blocks. It's almost cartoonish. And you'll have plenty of time to savor that, as it takes forever for anything to kill anything else now, vastly slowing down C&C's famous fast tempo. And the story... Merciful gods the story... C&C 3 had an extensive world-building side to it. It detailed the ravages of a tiberium future. It spun a cohesive narrative and had players scrambling for hidden objectives that unlocked intelligence notes, entries on units, events, and background that gave no other reward than simply learning about the setting. And they were fascinating enough that many players spent a lot of time hunting them down (just look at the number of online intel guides for proof). C&C 4 does none of that. It actively tries to get you to forget plot points from its predecessor. It erases the setting earlier games masterfully erected. The actual story is irrelevant because you won't be able to follow it; cut-scenes and briefings are overly melodramatic yet carry no real information. You'll be wondering 'why?' at the start of almost every mission. It's like reading a comic where half the panels were blacked out.

    Five thousand characters isn't enough to bemoan this wretched travesty. Command and Conquer deserved better than this. There isn't a single redeeming quality to this game. It is pathetic. EA knows this; it retails for half the price of its predecessor, despite being four years younger. I give it one point because it exists and doesn't actively give you cancer. That's really the best that can be said about it.    … Expand
  3. iamjack
    Jul 7, 2011
    0
    This is not the C&C i used to play....
    i am open for changes only if they are doing something good and make the game more fun and enjoyable
    but i can't find any of them... also i am a big fan of the mission crossing screen and movie... C&C or i should say WESTWOOD did it very well in the past and in C&C4....what EA have create is some sort of stupid class B movie style crap... i would say    This is not the C&C i used to play....
    i am open for changes only if they are doing something good and make the game more fun and enjoyable
    but i can't find any of them...
    also i am a big fan of the mission crossing screen and movie... C&C or i should say WESTWOOD did it very well in the past
    and in C&C4....what EA have create is some sort of stupid class B movie style crap...
    i would say even the C&C 1 movie is better than C&C4 except the increase of resolution....    … Expand
  4. Kirase
    Jan 1, 2012
    0
    Why did this get released? How can a big company like EA let something like this happen?
    There has to be someone in charge of giving the final "O.K." to release a certain product in a certain condition in a company like EA but judged by this game there simply isnt. Even then basic common sense should tell anyone that such garbage needs to get deleted instead of released.
  5. kane148
    Aug 6, 2012
    3
    As many have said, this game is not so much bad as mis-labled. EA made a huge mistake by trying to reinvent C&C gameplay in the final installment of a much-beloved series. Moreover, the storyline and acting was lousy and boring. After all this time of trying to figure out what Kane's master plan is, what the true origins of Nod are, what the fate of the planet will be, etc. this game givesAs many have said, this game is not so much bad as mis-labled. EA made a huge mistake by trying to reinvent C&C gameplay in the final installment of a much-beloved series. Moreover, the storyline and acting was lousy and boring. After all this time of trying to figure out what Kane's master plan is, what the true origins of Nod are, what the fate of the planet will be, etc. this game gives the player a huge middle finger. The gameplay itself is very annoying and confusing, and a pointless leveling system means that you need to play single player first if you want to have a shot in multiplayer (which might actually be a little fun).… Expand
  6. Priami
    Dec 19, 2012
    3
    What the hell were EA thinking? This was supposed to be epic ending for beloved game series and what did we got? No base-building, **** multiplayer, **** plot and hideous DRM! I know Westwood made SOME **** C&C games too but at least they were just spin-offs, not sequels.
  7. syphmonkey
    Mar 20, 2013
    3
    A garbage ending o a phenomenal series. The only thing familiar here are the cut scenes as everything else has been remodeled from scratch. This makes it not c&c at all. The game play is shoddy, the learning curve steep and unit count very low. You have to be online in order to progress too making it frustrating as hell when your internet connection is lost for few seconds 40 minutes intoA garbage ending o a phenomenal series. The only thing familiar here are the cut scenes as everything else has been remodeled from scratch. This makes it not c&c at all. The game play is shoddy, the learning curve steep and unit count very low. You have to be online in order to progress too making it frustrating as hell when your internet connection is lost for few seconds 40 minutes into a level. TL;DR Too Don't buy… Expand
  8. Dacoda
    May 17, 2013
    3
    Where do I begin. The worse always-online DRM? Maybe. The lack of any resource management? Also a good point. But the worst thing remains that the completely messed up a story that was so interesting to follow in the previous installment of the C&C series. Also, the units look worse and less realistic than they used to. The strategic element of the game that made C&C3 great is also mostlyWhere do I begin. The worse always-online DRM? Maybe. The lack of any resource management? Also a good point. But the worst thing remains that the completely messed up a story that was so interesting to follow in the previous installment of the C&C series. Also, the units look worse and less realistic than they used to. The strategic element of the game that made C&C3 great is also mostly gone. It is so sad that a game with so much potential is completely messed up by a incompetent development team. C&C4 had some good ideas, but they are just implemented in a very wrong way.… Expand
  9. TheAngryCritic
    Jan 15, 2014
    3
    Holy **** this game is terrible! First of all, you can't even build a base like you could in Tiberium wars and earlier. Gameplay is completely changed, EA better be joking about that this is the last game in the series. I will have to say, the music is good but honestly, besides the music, this game is ****
  10. Jason
    Mar 23, 2010
    0
    When i heard about C + C 4 i was really excited to see what it holds! When i saw the trailier it made it gave false hope and even the trailers made the game look ok. Anyway! after playing through the first 3 missions.. i hounestly cant bring myself to even play the game anymore.. one of my most fav games.. gone down the drain in something i was expecting to be the best game of 2010!
  11. 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
  12. 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..
  13. Chris25152001
    Aug 16, 2010
    0
    Why oh why change a winning game into a mainstream game this is happening with alot of games now. think they have changed it to appeal to young kids. It is alot less fun and exiting than Command & Conquer 3 and such a waste of money to buy. Stick to what you know and make a proper RTS game not a KRTS (kids real time strategy).
  14. TimY
    Mar 19, 2010
    0
    Great way to end my 2nd favourite franchise ever EA. Remove Base building, Tiberium harvesting and resource managment all toghther. I could stand C&C3 but now they ripped of DAwn of War 2 and made it with 10 times the epic fail. IF I could I would give it a -1.
  15. kanefriessner
    Jul 21, 2012
    3
    A bad ending of a great game series. The idiot and boring storytelling, also the idiot and boring story, the missing base building and management, the missing resource management and also the missing of the money are killing this game. You have only 1 "building" (called "Crawler") that can move like a big robot. You can choose from 3 Crawler types: Defensive, Attacking and Support. I thinkA bad ending of a great game series. The idiot and boring storytelling, also the idiot and boring story, the missing base building and management, the missing resource management and also the missing of the money are killing this game. You have only 1 "building" (called "Crawler") that can move like a big robot. You can choose from 3 Crawler types: Defensive, Attacking and Support. I think it's a total idiot idea, because you have nothing to defend. Only the Crawler maybe, but you can call another Crawler to the battlefield anytime if you want (in Singleplayer). After you deploy your Crawler, you can train/build your units for nothing. Yes, for nothing. There is no money in the game. Just click on the icon of the wanted unit and wait until it's ready. I think the developers wanted a game like Dawn of War 2. But hey, DoW2 is a real-time strategy with a huge tactical part (e.g. cover system). Where is this tactical part in C&C4? Nowhere! The multiplayer/skirmish has the same problem. It wanted to be like in DoW2 or Company of Heroes's "capture the big outposts to win" mode. But it's not work in this game. After the amazing C&C3, it's a big rubish. I can only say: don't buy this game, if you want a good strategy. If you are a masochist, maybe it's your game. Maybe.… Expand
  16. Raymondlee
    Nov 30, 2013
    0
    You can't even call this command and conquer despite units with the C&C look.
    It is nothing like command and conquer at all and the gameplay is boring and torturing. It is the first time I haven't finished the gameplay of neither GDI nor NOD sides and go to youtube to watch the ending.

    P.S. I am more than qualified to view this game. I have been playing C&C since its DOS version.
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. antdude
    Oct 4, 2010
    2
    It is not even RTS style like previous C&C games when I tried its betas. EA killed the series. C&C3 and its KW addon were the last good C&C games. Even the cutscenes were bad. :(
  20. nighter-3d
    Nov 17, 2010
    2
    i wish i could have been positive about Tiberium Twilight, but i can't.
    the C&C series have always been a traditional RTS(simple build,train,command,conquer), but 4 breaks that formula in a bad way.
    its okay if they want to try something else but they shouldn't use a well known series as a base for that. the story is also far below par. people who know a bit of the Tiberium universe    i wish i could have been positive about Tiberium Twilight, but i can't.
    the C&C series have always been a traditional RTS(simple build,train,command,conquer), but 4 breaks that formula in a bad way.
    its okay if they want to try something else but they shouldn't use a well known series as a base for that.
    the story is also far below par. people who know a bit of the Tiberium universe will probably find allot of loose ends in it.    … Expand
  21. Anticept
    Feb 27, 2011
    5
    It's not a terrible game standing by itself, but it's barely worth 10 dollars with the C&C title on it. Even when standing on it's own merits, it's still quite a generic game, and the cutscenes are dry and uninteresting. Kane, normally an intimidating and wise character, feels dead in this one. He doesn't have that shroud of mystery that was normally maintained in previous series. If theIt's not a terrible game standing by itself, but it's barely worth 10 dollars with the C&C title on it. Even when standing on it's own merits, it's still quite a generic game, and the cutscenes are dry and uninteresting. Kane, normally an intimidating and wise character, feels dead in this one. He doesn't have that shroud of mystery that was normally maintained in previous series. If the game had a better story and began BEFORE Kane allied with GDI, along with standard RTS elements, it would be worth an 8.5. Get a better engine instead of that crappy generals engine, and it would get a 10. On it's own right now, it get's a 5.… Expand
  22. auptyk
    Mar 4, 2011
    2
    I have been a huge fan of Command and Conquer for many years, and own all the games. However, when they started to announce this game and it was discovered that base building had been removed I said "pass"

    I didn't buy the game till it was on sale on Steam for 5 dollars the other week, and I still think I paid to much. It is not even a C&C game. No bases and all about micro. For the last    I have been a huge fan of Command and Conquer for many years, and own all the games. However, when they started to announce this game and it was discovered that base building had been removed I said "pass"

    I didn't buy the game till it was on sale on Steam for 5 dollars the other week, and I still think I paid to much. It is not even a C&C game. No bases and all about micro. For the last game in the series it was massively disappointing. Why after years of success would they alter the design so drastically. I have about 3 hours of play, and have no desire to play any more. If you were an uber micro person that always built minimal bases anyway you may enjoy the game. But if you are a macro player that just plays casually in Skirmish and used the game as your "offline" option, then this is not for you. Stick with C&C3    … Expand
  23. zakhennahr
    Jul 24, 2011
    0
    Basic theme of my review: You loved CnC 1 / 1.5 / 2 / 2.5 / 3 / 3.5? Don't waste your 4$ on this game like I unfortunately did.

    Long gone are the days where you would start off with little to now power and units and were expected to use skill and strategy to obtain resources and build up an army. No, today's version of Command and Conquer gets rid of all these silly concepts, puts you    Basic theme of my review: You loved CnC 1 / 1.5 / 2 / 2.5 / 3 / 3.5? Don't waste your 4$ on this game like I unfortunately did.

    Long gone are the days where you would start off with little to now power and units and were expected to use skill and strategy to obtain resources and build up an army. No, today's version of Command and Conquer gets rid of all these silly concepts, puts you down with *one* main building whose purpose is to... let you build from a list of all your available units right from the start, mass them up at no cost to you, send them on a killing spree, and repeat. This game would have earned points for its XP system of leveling up to unlock things had it done things right, or at least attempted to steal the ideas from Starcraft 2. But no, in CnC4 you aren't given the biggest tanks for the biggest missions, you need to unlock them by grinding, because that's what the last hope for the world has to do, right?
    Graphics look pretty, but then again you wouldn't be playing this series if you cared more about the graphics than the actual gameplay.
    Finally, I tried the skirmish mode against a computer since there is absolutely no one on multiplayer these days, and it's the same thing as single player: boring and repetitive.    … Expand
  24. pandarmada
    Jul 7, 2011
    0
    A Command and Conquer game without LAN play? .... no base building? ... It's only USD$4 on steam but this crap is not even worth that... sorry EA but after this and Bad company 2.... i will never be purchasing an EA game again.... you destroy franchises.

    Battlefield and Command and Conquer use to be 2 of my favorite games.... and there is a reason me and my friends still play red alert    A Command and Conquer game without LAN play? .... no base building? ... It's only USD$4 on steam but this crap is not even worth that... sorry EA but after this and Bad company 2.... i will never be purchasing an EA game again.... you destroy franchises.

    Battlefield and Command and Conquer use to be 2 of my favorite games.... and there is a reason me and my friends still play red alert 2 and BFV over your new games...    … Expand
  25. Phantasystar77
    Jun 23, 2012
    0
    I've been a huge fan of the C&C series since the first. I even loved the underrated Renegade spin-off. When I heard C&C 4 was coming out I was beyond happy. However I held off on buying the game until I found it really cheap because it contains lame DRM which requires you to be online at all time. After finally buying it and popping it in I was very let down to say the least.. First offI've been a huge fan of the C&C series since the first. I even loved the underrated Renegade spin-off. When I heard C&C 4 was coming out I was beyond happy. However I held off on buying the game until I found it really cheap because it contains lame DRM which requires you to be online at all time. After finally buying it and popping it in I was very let down to say the least.. First off it plays nothing like any of the other games in the series. Building is nearly non-existant, as is mining ore. About all you can build is units from a mobile factory which each side has. You are also restricted no only by a very strict unit cap, but which units you can build as well. You see in C&C 4 you have ranks. Your rank depends on what units you are allowed to build. This means for awhile you're going to be stuck with a few weak as heck units. This is not only in single player, but multi as well. It makes things so unbalanced and needlessly difficult it ruins the entire game. This game is horrible to say the least. I don't usually condone piracy, but with this one I can say the pirates got a better version. Not only can they play it offline, but they didn't pay a dime for this crap. Seriously, this has got to be one of the worst RTS games I have ever played and I have played a lot.… Expand
  26. Anarchy
    Mar 25, 2012
    0
    This game is absolute trash. EA strike again with their opportunistic cash-is-the-prime-directive behavior, by riding out the franchise until it's dead in the water. It's clear than EA have squeezed the absolute life out of this franchise as the quality of anything they've release related to the series has been inferior since Tiberium Sun.

    Joke's on you EA. Enjoy your expensive critical    This game is absolute trash. EA strike again with their opportunistic cash-is-the-prime-directive behavior, by riding out the franchise until it's dead in the water. It's clear than EA have squeezed the absolute life out of this franchise as the quality of anything they've release related to the series has been inferior since Tiberium Sun.

    Joke's on you EA. Enjoy your expensive critical panning. Not even worth pirating. Disgusting.    … Expand
  27. ishantil
    Dec 31, 2011
    2
    I picked up this game for 5$. I want my five dollars back.

    I think that that should set the tone for this review. None of the elements from the Tiberium games are in the game. No base building, no choosing your own play style, no actual strategy, simply build guys and throw them at the target until you are bored. The paper/rock/scissors type strength/weakness system added needless    I picked up this game for 5$. I want my five dollars back.

    I think that that should set the tone for this review. None of the elements from the Tiberium games are in the game. No base building, no choosing your own play style, no actual strategy, simply build guys and throw them at the target until you are bored.

    The paper/rock/scissors type strength/weakness system added needless non-intuitive complication. For what it's worth, for the short time that I played the game, it looks like the graphics were good, the environments were interesting, and that the sound and music were of good quality. It's really too bad that I have no intention of playing any further in the game to find out if the story was interesting.

    Here's hoping Bioware treats the C&C series like it should be. Or that C&C5 will return to the previous gameplay style.    … Expand
  28. citi100rider
    Jul 4, 2012
    0
    Very disappointed for a great series. C&C4 doesn't belongs to C&C series. It should be called by another name. EA has betrayed all the fan of C&C, no base building, no resource management, just ask for troops and keep attacking to take the point. If you haven't play C&C before, don't buy this game. If you still want to try this C&C4, I suggest you buying Company of heroes.
  29. Marauder_IIc
    Jan 1, 2012
    0
    There was nothing that made it C&C aside from the name and Cane. Simply not fun at all. The strategy aspect is almost gone completely. Make more units for free, zerg them, build more for free, oh that base is down....wake me when I won again.
    Lastly, the campaign cannot be beaten unless you have another player or unless you have levelled up in multi player (which sucks worse than the    There was nothing that made it C&C aside from the name and Cane. Simply not fun at all. The strategy aspect is almost gone completely. Make more units for free, zerg them, build more for free, oh that base is down....wake me when I won again.
    Lastly, the campaign cannot be beaten unless you have another player or unless you have levelled up in multi player (which sucks worse than the main game) to level up enough to do it solo. I have no problem with co-op games, RA3 you would do single or co-op.....but it was beatable either way. Even their online community said it cant be done at my level, and they were surprised I got as far as I did. They took everything that made C&C fun and took it away. Way to kill a franchise.....    … Expand
  30. AJHunter
    Mar 26, 2012
    2
    This game takes what I, personally, loved most, and chucked it out the window. No more base-building, no more resource management. Just OK, HERE ARE YOUR GUYS AND SOME LITTLE BUILDINGS GO KILL THINGS. The only reason this is getting a 2 is because it looks good and at least kept the live-action cut scenes. That's all it really kept from previous titles. Don't buy this game if you were aThis game takes what I, personally, loved most, and chucked it out the window. No more base-building, no more resource management. Just OK, HERE ARE YOUR GUYS AND SOME LITTLE BUILDINGS GO KILL THINGS. The only reason this is getting a 2 is because it looks good and at least kept the live-action cut scenes. That's all it really kept from previous titles. Don't buy this game if you were a fan of previous titles.… Expand
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 »