Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3

 PC
User Score
6.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 593 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 324 out of 593
  2. Mixed: 153 out of 593
  3. Negative: 116 out of 593
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. JohnS
    Jan 10, 2009
    4
    I have loved the C&C series, but ever since EA got a hold of it, it seems to be dying. While RA3 is probably EA's best C&C game, it still isn't that good. The new resource-gathering techniques make the gameplay slow, the units are extra expensive, extra buildings build MCVs, barracks and war factories buy extra upgrades to buy decent units. Games last far too long with the I have loved the C&C series, but ever since EA got a hold of it, it seems to be dying. While RA3 is probably EA's best C&C game, it still isn't that good. The new resource-gathering techniques make the gameplay slow, the units are extra expensive, extra buildings build MCVs, barracks and war factories buy extra upgrades to buy decent units. Games last far too long with the gameplay being far too slow. True, this game will probably be revived once some good mods come out for it, but I personally got bored with it just after days of playing it. Sure it has flashy graphics, but you won't be able to stand the gameplay for very long.… Expand
  2. EricO
    Jan 18, 2010
    4
    Just a really bad RTS. The units are not fun to use, too complicated, or just badly designed. On top of that, basic elements of the interface that have been around in other RTS games to streamline control do not exist. For example, you can't deploy single units from a transport. You have to deploy all of them. Units that move from ground to air via special ability select with those Just a really bad RTS. The units are not fun to use, too complicated, or just badly designed. On top of that, basic elements of the interface that have been around in other RTS games to streamline control do not exist. For example, you can't deploy single units from a transport. You have to deploy all of them. Units that move from ground to air via special ability select with those on the ground when selecting all like units. There's also terrible AI even with your own units. Units with no defense will just sit there and get attacked instead of running away. And units with offense just out of range of say a tower, will sit there and die rather than moving automatically to engage the tower. It's such a bad game. I will never buy another command and conquer game after this. They've ruined it.… Expand
  3. JulianAcosta
    Mar 1, 2009
    4
    I think its not like old red alert, EA make red alert to loose its real feel of playing. I can really make a difference between Westwood and EA, for me the best Red Alert was the first one. Red Alert 3 its joke for real command and conquer, it seems like EA didnt want expend much time so they make this red alert 3 really auwfull
  4. DerekT
    Jan 7, 2009
    4
    I was a huge fan of RA2 back in the good Westwood days. It really sucks that EA managed to get their hands on such a gem of a game, because honestly I think they spend too much effort on the 'Live action movies' which are all basicly pro american soft-core porn vids of busty women hanging around generals and marines. If you were a Red Alert fan like I was I would not suggest I was a huge fan of RA2 back in the good Westwood days. It really sucks that EA managed to get their hands on such a gem of a game, because honestly I think they spend too much effort on the 'Live action movies' which are all basicly pro american soft-core porn vids of busty women hanging around generals and marines. If you were a Red Alert fan like I was I would not suggest buying this game. It looks and feels slightly the same but really lacks actual effort being put into it. It's just dumbed down too far for kids.… Expand
  5. LászlóG.
    Nov 19, 2008
    4
    Nice graphics, and the co-op mode is a good shot, but after i mentioned this two new features, there is nothing new to say. No, really there is nothing to say, this game has nice graphics ( water), bad actors ( especially, the russian characters were poorly played.) and the possibility to call your friend to help you complete a mission.... by the way it takes only 4 hours ( cigarette and Nice graphics, and the co-op mode is a good shot, but after i mentioned this two new features, there is nothing new to say. No, really there is nothing to say, this game has nice graphics ( water), bad actors ( especially, the russian characters were poorly played.) and the possibility to call your friend to help you complete a mission.... by the way it takes only 4 hours ( cigarette and coffe breaks included) to finish the russian champaign on hard..... oh my god... couldn't you just resurrect the old C&C feeling?… Expand
  6. RalphW.
    Nov 13, 2008
    4
    Being a big Red Alert 2 fan I am very disappointed. The graphics are hard to decipher it is unclear from visual examination what the units do. The whole base building side is a joke - just place an ore refinery infront of the ore - boring. I miss my Russian tanks etc - I was really looking forward to this game but I doubt I will play it at all - feel cheated - especially after reading the Being a big Red Alert 2 fan I am very disappointed. The graphics are hard to decipher it is unclear from visual examination what the units do. The whole base building side is a joke - just place an ore refinery infront of the ore - boring. I miss my Russian tanks etc - I was really looking forward to this game but I doubt I will play it at all - feel cheated - especially after reading the glowing reviews.… Expand
  7. M.Alex
    Jan 21, 2009
    4
    Unfortunatly, I'm very disappointed by this game. I'm primarily a single-player person, and the co-op doesn't entice me at all, and playing with a AI commander is incredibly irritating. I really loved C&C3, which was a good step after the horrid Generals, but in this part of the franchise EA managed to loose the plot again. Shame.
  8. Petrovita
    Jun 19, 2011
    4
    The game is good, and has humour. But it's nothing like the old RA games from Westwood. If you enjoyed those games, and think about buying this, you really should see videos first. As stated by others, it's more comical (With the graphics), has more loose humour, and alot of eye candy, which personally in my opinion is just to attract young teenagers into buying the game. One thing IThe game is good, and has humour. But it's nothing like the old RA games from Westwood. If you enjoyed those games, and think about buying this, you really should see videos first. As stated by others, it's more comical (With the graphics), has more loose humour, and alot of eye candy, which personally in my opinion is just to attract young teenagers into buying the game. One thing I noticed when I played, was that the troops in the game (like a conscript), when killed, the corpse will remain on the ground for quite abit unlike other games. The bodies can even be flinged or moved around after the unit/s die. I was annoyed that there wasn't a map generator in it like the previous RA games. Luckily, the nets provided a map generator mod for the game. I would not recommend this game more than the old games. Nothing will ever beat the old Westwood games.… Expand
  9. riley794
    Jun 9, 2017
    4
    After a very enjoyable reply of StarCraft II I gave C&C RA II another chance and was just as disappointed the second time. Many people wonder what happened to RTS games. All they need to do is play this camping garbage to understand. The solo mission are just terrible with no choice. You have to do exactly what the game wants at the start of every mission. The invisible walls thatAfter a very enjoyable reply of StarCraft II I gave C&C RA II another chance and was just as disappointed the second time. Many people wonder what happened to RTS games. All they need to do is play this camping garbage to understand. The solo mission are just terrible with no choice. You have to do exactly what the game wants at the start of every mission. The invisible walls that this game has and that SCII does not is why the studio was scrapped and RTS is at an all time low. Learn from their bad example!… Expand
  10. MikeG.
    Nov 25, 2008
    3
    Hmmm...where to begin. As a C&C fan of the older games, this version created by EA has me scratching my head in between imprinting keys on my forehead. It feels like it was an obligatory installment, and not something done well except hitting all of the right 'selling marks': Sex and RA. Just the fact that they made Tanya a blonde in this installment instead of a brunette like Hmmm...where to begin. As a C&C fan of the older games, this version created by EA has me scratching my head in between imprinting keys on my forehead. It feels like it was an obligatory installment, and not something done well except hitting all of the right 'selling marks': Sex and RA. Just the fact that they made Tanya a blonde in this installment instead of a brunette like in the previous two annoys me. Various plot flaws, including the presence of the chronosphere and lack of other chrono units annoys me. A lack of returning cast (General Carville, anyone?) hurts, but the current cast suffices, though the whole purpose of the female cast is to show as much as possible to the player, in terms of skin. Micromanagement of what little units there are can be frustrating in a large group of mixed units. a decided lack of a unit capable of ferrying land-locked vehicles across water without resorting to the massive plot-flaw that is the chronosphere extremely annoying. Ore collecting is a joke, lacking any possibility of a renewable resource for those long boxing matches I used to savor with the opponent, which now is usually taken out by my computer counterpart from sheer unit-pumping ability. I now have an obnoxious computer that I must lead by the hand in particular missions, as well as lose opportunities in commandeering enemy structures because the computer's units are trigger happy. Once again, I feel like a great game is squandered to pay fanservice to the almighty console gamer, the complete lack of a PC-oriented game in a PC-based series. They don't even dignify the PC version by hosting it's own matchmaking service, instead relying on the horrid Gamespy service for multiplayer capabilities, whereas the console version merely uses it's own services. I remember a time when this series of games was exactly that: A series. Now, it feels like a game produced for the sake of it.… Expand
  11. ChrisK
    Apr 3, 2009
    3
    Honestly, I was sorely disappointed in RA3. It felt like too much of a rehash - reusing the units with special abilities from C&C3 (and dumbing them down, presumably for the console releases), reusing the General abilities from C&C Generals (which were okay for that game, but seeing them again was NOT enjoyable), and throwing all of that together with the RA storyline... well, overall I Honestly, I was sorely disappointed in RA3. It felt like too much of a rehash - reusing the units with special abilities from C&C3 (and dumbing them down, presumably for the console releases), reusing the General abilities from C&C Generals (which were okay for that game, but seeing them again was NOT enjoyable), and throwing all of that together with the RA storyline... well, overall I just didn't like this game. It doesn't help that the much touted "Cooperative play" feature feels more like a "Way too ****ing easymode," and I was playing on Normal. :I But then, when your AI buddy is spamming the enemy with near infinite resources worth of units, well. Give it a pass if you want an RTS that's actually somewhat challenging. If you want one that plays like cheats are always enabled, this'd be the game for you.… Expand
  12. aaronh
    Jul 20, 2009
    3
    Red alert 2 was really good, it had a simple gameplay, low graphics for your average computer at the time to take, and somewhat realistic units, some a little futuristic, but not over the top. in comparison, this game takes up a ton of graphics, looks (in my opinion) too cartoon-ish. yes i know thats what they go for, but i still think that tiberium wars type graphics/units would get a Red alert 2 was really good, it had a simple gameplay, low graphics for your average computer at the time to take, and somewhat realistic units, some a little futuristic, but not over the top. in comparison, this game takes up a ton of graphics, looks (in my opinion) too cartoon-ish. yes i know thats what they go for, but i still think that tiberium wars type graphics/units would get a much better score from players. in my opinion, the only good thing about this game is the cinematics and co-op. (i am not slamming the c&c series however, this is the first "bad" game so far).… Expand
  13. StevenBarna
    Oct 1, 2008
    3
    While they do have a good storyline (supposedly) EA has absolutely killed this game. Not only did they manage to make war all cartoonish, but now the units perform ridiculous functions, and the new fraction Empire of the Rising Sun? What a horrible name that is! Red Alert Fans worldwide beware, long gone is the glorious battleground brought to you by Westwood... all that's left is aWhile they do have a good storyline (supposedly) EA has absolutely killed this game. Not only did they manage to make war all cartoonish, but now the units perform ridiculous functions, and the new fraction Empire of the Rising Sun? What a horrible name that is! Red Alert Fans worldwide beware, long gone is the glorious battleground brought to you by Westwood... all that's left is a kiddie version that looks like it is shooting for a E 10 rating.… Expand
  14. CBCB
    Nov 16, 2008
    3
    Red Alert 3 is a bastardized, arcade version of the classic RTS genre. It is an exercise in monetizing the franchise by EA and a way to boost their stock price. If you are not already a Red Alert fanatic, you'll likely rate this game a 40% (no grade inflation). The graphics are updated and look very good. There are a lot of vividly animated and colored units with the usual funny Red Alert 3 is a bastardized, arcade version of the classic RTS genre. It is an exercise in monetizing the franchise by EA and a way to boost their stock price. If you are not already a Red Alert fanatic, you'll likely rate this game a 40% (no grade inflation). The graphics are updated and look very good. There are a lot of vividly animated and colored units with the usual funny voices. A lot of people are up in arms about the cut scenes - when regarded in that light, Red Alert 3 is more of an interactive third tier movie. For $10 you can do much better in a movie theater (or for much less if you use Netflix like I do). The strategy part of the game, i.e. its core, is flawed. I personally hated the protocol concept. Basically you can have an enemy that is defeated, down to his last building and out of money and units, yet he can still control a series of devastating attacks that will savage your base and army. It is just silly. One of the interesting aspects of traditional RTS is that they combine resource management with the army build-up and the actual combat. Once you remove a big portion of your damage generation from the economic supply chain the game becomes just a silly arcade. Play whac-a-mole with your opponent's army using a silly set of tools like the magnetic satellite that pulls entire ships into outer space. And do that all for free... Basically the entire balance of power can be switched around with a few lucky deployments of the other guy's protocols particularly on larger maps. The protocols are overpowered and especially as they do not cost anything they ruin the strategic element of the game.… Expand
  15. JakeS.
    Nov 21, 2008
    3
    Someone else said that this game is only appealing to Red Alert fans. I am in that category and I want to shoot whomever is responsible. Sadly, my wife gave it to me as a gift. She knows how much I loved RA2 and she was so happy to buy it for me. Now I have to pretend that I like it.
  16. JoeM.
    Dec 8, 2008
    3
    I bought this game, only to take it back 24 hours later. The onlything interesting about this game is the coop. There are no unique units, no fun maps, the acting is terrible and quite frankly, its just an embarassment to EA games. I took a careful look at those who dared give this game anything higher than a 75 rating.
  17. IvanC
    Feb 20, 2009
    3
    The first Command and Conquer I didn't enjoy. I can't get into it. It's just not fun, I liked every iteration of this series and I love innovation. Ignoring the video clips which are on par with all the others in the series, the game mechanics don't feel right. I find myself playing this out of loyalty to the franchise (and to justify buying the game) but it lacks the The first Command and Conquer I didn't enjoy. I can't get into it. It's just not fun, I liked every iteration of this series and I love innovation. Ignoring the video clips which are on par with all the others in the series, the game mechanics don't feel right. I find myself playing this out of loyalty to the franchise (and to justify buying the game) but it lacks the magic of the previous versions. All units have two types of attack but the menu system is annoying. Some units are just plain novel and only used because they're all you have in the single player mode. I can't understand the high review scores, perhaps I'll play it again and change my mind, maybe I'm missing something. In the meantime I'll stick to the skirmishes in Tiberium Wars. Unforgivable taking away the ore/tiberium mining and replacing it with boring oil derek's. Good to see Mr Solo make a come back via the world of failed actors who end up in video games though.… Expand
  18. JH
    Nov 18, 2008
    3
    The AI is abysmal in the campaign (friendly AI keeps dying), and in skirmishes (rushes early in the game, then is easily decimated if you survive the one-time rush). The game is RA2 on speed... everything needs to be micromanaged and done at extreme speeds or you will be raped. It honestly feels like RA2 reboxed with some new units and graphics. EA has yet again shown its abilities of The AI is abysmal in the campaign (friendly AI keeps dying), and in skirmishes (rushes early in the game, then is easily decimated if you survive the one-time rush). The game is RA2 on speed... everything needs to be micromanaged and done at extreme speeds or you will be raped. It honestly feels like RA2 reboxed with some new units and graphics. EA has yet again shown its abilities of taking an existing game and re-releasing with ass gameplay and buggy AI.… Expand
  19. PhilH
    Nov 7, 2008
    3
    I'm absolutely shocked by the scores supposedly professional reviewers gave this game. In all honesty I think it has to rate as one of the worst RTS games of recent years, it's staggeringly poor. Maybe if games like Company of Heroes, World In Conflict, Supreme Commander and Dawn of War didn't exist it'd be able to call itself average, but honestly I can't think I'm absolutely shocked by the scores supposedly professional reviewers gave this game. In all honesty I think it has to rate as one of the worst RTS games of recent years, it's staggeringly poor. Maybe if games like Company of Heroes, World In Conflict, Supreme Commander and Dawn of War didn't exist it'd be able to call itself average, but honestly I can't think of a more infantile, braindead, cheesy game in its genre. The graphics are reasonably well presented, but the artistic concept is like something out of a bad cartoon as the art team do their best to emulate the look of Starcraft and fail. The units are uniformly stupid and inconsistent, the interface is immensely dated, the maps are poor and small. I mean take away the shiny graphics and it'd struggle to be better than the original. It's like a decade of innovation in the genre never happened. I got this game for free through work and I still felt cheated. Free is too expensive.… Expand
  20. Zak
    Jan 19, 2009
    3
    They completely ruined it. The first Red Alert wasn't cartoony, silly, or remotely light hearted. It was a violent, scary portrayal of war, with gassing, bombing, and even a cinematic with Stalin being buried alive. EA shouldn't be trying to make the Red Alert series their funny line, they should get Westwood back and make some good games. Though the soundtrack was awesome.
  21. killzon32
    Jun 11, 2012
    3
    EA has failed to appease its gamers they have defiled the c&c series and it saddens me, Red alert 3 was hyped up as being a true c&c game but failed to achieve this goal, it is not competitive the story is off track.... And no Ore really wtf EA seriously go lay in a pit forever.
  22. Kirase
    Jan 1, 2012
    3
    EA tried to take the strenghs of this games predecessor to a new level, completely failed and ridiculed the complete franchise this way. A company like blizzard or valve would have simply thrown this into the garbage to not damage its reputation. Not only judged by its big name and the big expectations it could not life up to this game is simply just plain bad. Guess i never played a worseEA tried to take the strenghs of this games predecessor to a new level, completely failed and ridiculed the complete franchise this way. A company like blizzard or valve would have simply thrown this into the garbage to not damage its reputation. Not only judged by its big name and the big expectations it could not life up to this game is simply just plain bad. Guess i never played a worse rts before.… Expand
  23. Canney
    Jul 2, 2012
    3
    GOD, please look after the future of C&C. I do not think that it is capable in the corrupt hands of the greedy.
    I'm not a religious man by any means, but I do not have any faith in the EA handling of the C&C universe. Since Red Alert 2, each subsequent release from EA LA has buried this once glorious game deeper, and deeper, deeper still in EA's own septic waste. C&C3 was a step in the    GOD, please look after the future of C&C. I do not think that it is capable in the corrupt hands of the greedy.
    I'm not a religious man by any means, but I do not have any faith in the EA handling of the C&C universe. Since Red Alert 2, each subsequent release from EA LA has buried this once glorious game deeper, and deeper, deeper still in EA's own septic waste. C&C3 was a step in the right direction. C&C:RA3 however proves how out of touch EA really is. The once solid design, mechanics & love implemented by Westwood has been replaced with **** arrogant design, heavily sedated and influenced by other game universes, manga, and comic books. You would be forgiven if you thought this would improve the game formula. Sadly it does not. Co-op is a feature implemented during a period of 'every-game-must-have-co-op' madness at EA. EA have thrown money into the cast rather than the game and is marketing sex appeal and fantasy rather than science fiction. The result is a game which is prehistoric before it ever launched. Too many 'new' features to entice customers. New feature this, new feature that, battlecast, **** and ass, stereotypes that will bore the balls off you.

    The game has some nice tech, and they have obviously tried hard to bring back the cut-scenes story arc to submerse the gamer. But the direction is just abysmal, and the story is a lame duck that couldn't hatch a fart without popping a blood vessel in it's eye.

    My gut feeling is that RA2 (and just barely C&C3) are the last straws in what was once a very enjoyable universe that will be remembered fondly until EA gets it's s**t together and stops leaving the design in the hands of an 8 year old.    … Expand
  24. James009
    Sep 28, 2014
    3
    So far removed from classics such as Red Alert and Red Alert 2 this game destroys the series mythos in favor of crazy units and far removed storyline.
  25. LysanderS
    Jan 2, 2010
    2
    The only tactic is zerging. The art of zerging is a tricky business. It onvolves quickly capping a resource point, then spamming top tier units out as quickly as possible to march on the enemy base. By tricky, "i mean what the hell, are there even any tactics here?!" If you want some nice tactics, gorgeous graphics and a load of fun, i suggest you look elsewhere, specifically Company of The only tactic is zerging. The art of zerging is a tricky business. It onvolves quickly capping a resource point, then spamming top tier units out as quickly as possible to march on the enemy base. By tricky, "i mean what the hell, are there even any tactics here?!" If you want some nice tactics, gorgeous graphics and a load of fun, i suggest you look elsewhere, specifically Company of Heroes. If you want...i don't know what the hell this game offers...boring, repetitive gameplay, ugly graphics...then you came to the right place. While other games use gameplay to catch gamers' attention, this game uses skimpily girls and terrible voice acting. So, so cheesy. Do not buy this "game".… Expand
  26. TimB
    Nov 19, 2008
    2
    Abysmal AI. Resource collection (a key part of RA) is nearly non-existent. They seemed to spend more on boobs than they did on the AI and gameplay.
  27. AdamP
    Nov 16, 2009
    2
    A horrible injustice of a game. It's an obvious show of cards on EA games releasing bright and flashy games. There are some good ideas, but every good idea is trumped with 3 bad ones.
  28. BR
    Mar 17, 2009
    2
    Personally, I think red alert 2 graphics are better. Gameplay is weak and units are very limited. I'm very disappointed in this. I agree with one of the others reviewing this game, I would love a refund. The 10 dollars i spent on Red Alert 3 were not worth it.
  29. M_Alex
    Mar 26, 2011
    2
    The co-op mode probably is fun when you play with a friend. But its absolutely horrid when playing with the computer. The AI is awful. Apart from that i agree with people who consider it "dumbed down". I could survive the fact that apart from the co-op mode it does not offer anything new, but not in a situation when every mission gives you a feeling of deja vu. The units also aren'tThe co-op mode probably is fun when you play with a friend. But its absolutely horrid when playing with the computer. The AI is awful. Apart from that i agree with people who consider it "dumbed down". I could survive the fact that apart from the co-op mode it does not offer anything new, but not in a situation when every mission gives you a feeling of deja vu. The units also aren't particularly any fun, and all you have todo is master the strategy of building a huge army ASAP. The game might be OK if you have a mate to play it with, or if you hadn't had much experience with other RTS, but other thanthat - avoid it at all cost.… Expand
  30. marqpas
    Oct 7, 2010
    2
    The units are plastic toys. It's war for 4-8 year olds, really cute. Little tankies that talk to you. The warzone looks like it was designed by the team that also does Wallace & Gromit. No scary Yuri, but a lovely Japanese girl with VERY stylish hair. A real winner. Co-op is a brand new mode, which demonstrates to you how bad AI can be programmed. For 6-8 year olds, there is an ongoingThe units are plastic toys. It's war for 4-8 year olds, really cute. Little tankies that talk to you. The warzone looks like it was designed by the team that also does Wallace & Gromit. No scary Yuri, but a lovely Japanese girl with VERY stylish hair. A real winner. Co-op is a brand new mode, which demonstrates to you how bad AI can be programmed. For 6-8 year olds, there is an ongoing boobies show. Do yourself a favor and buy or download Red Alert 2. Or any other RTS, really.… Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

26
#26 Best PC Game of 2008
18
#18 Most Discussed PC Game of 2008
11
#11 Most Shared PC Game of 2008

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
82

Generally favorable reviews - based on 55 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 48 out of 55
  2. Mixed: 7 out of 55
  3. Negative: 0 out of 55
  1. PC Gamer
    92
    Any game in which a giant laser cannon pops out of Teddy Roosevelt's head on Mt. Rushmore is a winner in my book...Red Alert 3 is a highly polished game that doesn't take itself the least bit seriously, and co-op play might jus be the next big thing in RTS. [Holiday 2008, p.62]
  2. GamePro
    80
    Red Alert 3 is by no means a bad addition to the Red Alert series, but compared to its forebears it lacks much of the panache the series held and may hold some disappointments for fans despite the addition of a good new faction and a fairly satisfying single-player experience.
    Read full review
  3. GameSpy
    80
    What was a tongue-in-cheek look at Cold War paranoia married to solid RTS gameplay has blossomed into a pure comedy that retains the easy-to-pick-up and addictive-as-peanuts gameplay of the best in the Command & Conquer franchise. It's not a game that will redefine strategy gaming, but it is one heck of an enjoyable ride.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »