User Reviews (1 - 11 of 194)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Great Strategy in Multiplayer Mode

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 96 / 105
Date: March 15, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I'm a huge fan of the Command and Conquer series, so buying Generals didn't require any thought. We were rewarded with great graphics and amazing multiplayer gameplay.

First, the good. The graphics are quite impressive, definitely a step up from previous games. The various terrains - from snow to sand to grass to concrete - are well done. The trees sway in the wind. The units leave little tracks as they move, the construction of buildings makes you really feel like you're watching an army base get built.

The sound and music is well matched and makes the game feel realistic. Controls all work just the way you'd hope they would - after so many games they really have that down to a science.

On the down side, the usual problems in strategy gaming exist here. pathfinding isn't always perfect, units get stuck against buildings or in chasms. The campaign missions help you learn your skills but aren't extremely challenging.

Still, as with just about every game that comes out today, the built in gameplay is merely a training ground for the real challenge of multiplay. There's no way a computer could compete with the challenge posed by a real human being with experience and knowledge at the other end of the map. This game really shines in multiplayer. The three sets of units are well balanced, and if you get yourself onto a large map with teammates and opponents, you'll be hooked for months.

Skirmish mode is quite fun too, earning medals for different accomplishments.

Definitely a great game for any strategy gaming fan!

A whole new experience

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 34 / 40
Date: January 24, 2003
Author: Amazon User

Command and Conquer enters a whole new war as the Chinese and terrorists enter the Command and Conquer series. Generals sports a new 3d engine which is starting to pop up in a lot of games which allows you to zoom in to see the action. The action is also a lot cooler and feels more realistic (even though the weaponry seems kinda comical at times). Generals also impliments new weaponry and spying technology like UAV's and satellites. Another new feature is the ability to customize vehicles by adding turrets or upgrading weaponry (machien gun turrets on tanks, laser guided bombs for stealths, missile barages for apache helicopters). Command and Conquer enthusiasts might be surprised though as a few things are different in Generals. The Veteran system is a new design to the game plus you no longer have resource fields. Instead, you have big stacks of supplies sort of like Warcraft goldmines. Also, you no longer have Primary buildings, it is more like starcraft where you build stuff per building. So now you can build 6 barracks and get 6 troops at once. Also, arrow keys function as unit changers instead of moving the map so this may seem to be a minor problem. Also, there seems to be a limited amount of buildings but i do not believe this to be a problem since in other C&C games, a lot of buildings were just needed to activate special items (special items of the sort are activated in command centers/barrackses and war factories instead of in special buildings). In the end, Generals might be a very fun game in the final release (im doing the multiplayer beta test). So far it looks like loads of fun but a little different from teh old C&C games. NOTE: One review says the specifications are VERY HIGH, but this is very wrong. The multiplayer beta that is out right now is using unoptimized code which runs slow on anything (2ghz , 512 ram neccessary to play it). The final release will use the optomized code of course and only need the 350 mhz 64mb specifications Westwood is saying it will need.

Command & Conquer: Generals - Amazing!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 51 / 69
Date: December 18, 2002
Author: Amazon User

For all strategy players in the world, this is a must-have and even better. For those who have tried the previous Command & Conquer games, it is a little step away from them. Buildings no longer just pop up from the ground, here you use bulldozers or workers for building things. Generals also uses a new "experience system", this means you get more experience points for each unit/building you destroy. The experience points is used to buy new upgrades, how many upgrades you got depends on your rank.

Even though I'm only playing the beta test, this is the best game I ever tried. This is a must-have!

PS: The age 12, really isn't my age...

Enough is enough.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 72 / 117
Date: February 13, 2003
Author: Amazon User

This is 2003, and I for one have completely had it with Westwood's ridiculously bad AI. We took this kind of unit stupidity in 1992 with Dune 2 when the RTS genre was new, but when is Westwood finally going to wake up, smell the coffee, and realize that they can't just keep putting new graphics on the same game, give a minor gameplay tweak here and there, ignore the AI and corresponding strategy elements, and expect us to dutifully keep swallowing it and shelling out the bucks?

What was the original C&C's gameplay like? Click click click click, build build build build, then click to attack (or defend) with your hundreds of units. Repeat. And repeat. Until someone edges out a win because they clicked slightly faster, or the tiberium is done and a victory is squeaked in via attrition. Now fast forward to 2003 and C&C: Generals. What's the gameplay like? Click click click click, build build build build, then click to attack (or defend) with your hundreds of units. Repeat. And repeat. Etc ad nauseum.

This isn't strategy. In fact the so-called "Real-Time Strategy" has never been about strategy at all...it's just a marketing term to give a very rote, very brain-numbing kind of gameplay more of a cerebral spin. Well a lot of us tolerated that lack of strategy and AI, with the hope that as the genre matured, Westwood would have enough vision (if not common sense) to finally put in a worthy AI and make these games a truly fun, strategic challenge to play. Well they never did, and with what we're seeing, it doesn't look like they ever will...all they do is spend all of their resources - ALL of them - on graphics. The computer "opponents" and units are all as stupid as ever, and once you learn the units and the rote action, gameplay is also just as coma-inducing. :P

Save your money and your time. You haven't just seen this before, it's practically all you've seen if you've followed Westwood games, and anyone expecting this game to finally start using the immense amount of potential computer intelligence available to us with modern PCs, will be very disappointed indeed. "C&C: Generals"? More like Mindless Clickfest 2003. Pass.

Awesome and gorgeous

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 24 / 35
Date: January 18, 2003
Author: Amazon User

Wow! This game really rocks. I've been playing the multiplayer test (released in November) and its nothing short of amazing. I haven't had this much fun playing an RTS for ages - and I'm a huge Starcraft fan. The test is months old and I can only imagine how far the game has come since then. I wasn't much of an Age fan since its moves so slow and Red Alert 2 was good but not a must have for me. So far, this one blows them away. I recommend you get this on the first day.

Yes, it's nothing new, but...

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 17 / 22
Date: March 27, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I have read endless complaints about how Command & Conquer Generals is exactly like every other C&C/Dune game. Really, now, what do you expect? Perhaps Generals is a victim of some serious hype, and it certainly isn't a revolutionary RTS in any way except for graphics, but it still is fun.

Though it has some improvements in terms of interface, commands, and most notably upgrades, Generals plays a lot like most of the older games in the series. One notable difference is that you can build anywhere on the map, in a manner similar to the Blizzard RTS style. Like its most recent predecessor, Red Alert 2, you want to play offensive in this game. It's not as impossible to fight defensively as some reviewers have said, but it's always better to be the one calling the shots.

In terms of the game balance and strategies, the three sides are definitely unique and very well balanced out. For example, the Chinese prefer to outnumber their enemies, and have slow but powerful units. The GLA is king of maneuverability and the covert strike, but has all around weaker units. The United States has the most powerful forces, but everything is expensive. In a manner of speaking, this balance is similar to that of the three major houses in the Dune games.

The really interesting thing comes with the general abilities. These are received when you've destroyed a certain number of enemies, and can seriously tip the balance in your favor. Some abilities allow you to build special units, while others do more mundane but still important things like repairing a group of vehicles or giving new units instant veterancy. Units gain experience and rank as they kill enemies, and can get very powerful if you keep them alive. Some factions can upgrade units by paying or, in the GLA's case, by scavenging junk from the battlefield (a very cool touch!). There isn't a doubt that Generals grants more tactical options than any other C&C title. Unlike say, Red Alert, the objective isn't just to build as many tanks as you can (although this might still work).

Generals has cutting-edge 3D graphics, which explains the high system requirements. I found that it ran quite well at the lowest detail settings on my PIII 733 with an old GeForce 256, but to really bring out the beauty of the game you need something better than this. All the units explode in random and often spectacular fashion, and the superweapons are a MUST see. Almost everything you find can be destroyed in one way or another, and some things really light off when they go (toxin tanks, towers, or nuke power plants for example).

The single player mode of the game is the weakest point of Generals. It lacks any of the ridiculous full motion video sequences that made Red Alert really fun. The missions range from simple to moderately difficult, but there aren't very many in all. The plot looks like it was taken right off CNN, ... In skirmish mode, the AI is quite predictable and only becomes a pain when it starts using superweapons on you. Due to the unit and general promotion system, I've had little trouble mowing down the maximum of 7 computer opponents by myself. This game was clearly created as a primarily multiplay title, and it is definitely a good deal of fun for that. The game engine is also superior, and has enormous potential for future development. Perhaps in a forthcoming expansion the single player deficiencies will be addressed.

The final word is that Generals isn't the groundbreaking game everyone expected, but it is worth the price tag and a great deal of fun anyway. Especially in a time when the RTS genre seems to be on temporary hold, this game makes a great filler.

very disappointing

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 13 / 17
Date: April 23, 2003
Author: Amazon User

I am a C&C fan but was very disappointed by the latest release, C&C Generals.
A lot of problems are still there, you would imagine them being fixed by now. The AI is still just stupid & predictable, units dont respond when fired at, pathfinding sucks. There is no storyline. Missions are repetitive, too easy, too few in number and all of them boil down to 'blow up the enemy base'. The AI still cheats, it keeps building faster than you even without any income, it knows exactly where any of your buildings is located without ever entering your base or using a spydrone. Multiplayer is still plagued by the tankrush. It is too bad the navy has been eliminated.

even though the graphics are superb and it is a lot of fun to nuke the enemy base it takes more than that to make a great game.
Needles to say the game is not playable on the recommended system, you need something far more powerful.

Buy it used, it is not worth the full price.

A polished (and final) entry in the C&C series

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 8 / 8
Date: April 22, 2003
Author: Amazon User

This latest entry in the Command and Conquer series will, unfortunately, probably be the very last as Westwood was just recently amalgamated into Electronic Arts.

In accordance with this amalgamation, the plotline for this game is radically different from its predecessors. The Brotherhood of Nod have been replaced with the GLA, while the US and Chinese armies have taken the place of the GDI.

The storyline for Generals is an uncomfortable reflection of real life events, with GLA terrorists invading middle eastern nations like Baghdad and Afghanistan. Naturally, the Chinese and the US are out to stop them. The parallels are a little too close to reality, and this does remove some of the fun and campiness from the game that were often present in its predecessors. Red Alert 2 was a delightful example of this.

This is also the first C&C game that contains more than 2 sides, which makes for some rather entertaining skirmish and campaign missions.

The US uses a combination of air power and ground forces to crush their opponents, with very little emphasis on "weapons of mass destruction". Instead, the player would be wise to use precision airstrikes and artillery to crush their opponents.

The GLA have units very similar to NOD, in that they are fast, light and mobile. This makes them very useful for ambushes, but they become expendable in prolonged skirmishes. Their greatest strength lies in the effective use of suicide bombers and toxic bio-weapons. The GLA is a good side for those who use stealth to defeat their opponents.

The Chinese use overwhelming numbers and firepower to defeat their enemies. Fans of the old "tank rush" strategy will love playing as the Chinese, especially as Chinese tanks get attack bonuses if they are grouped in large enough numbers.

The graphics in Generals are easily the most impressive of any entry in the C&C series. The game makes excellent use of 3D-accelerated graphics to render huge maps consisting of mountains and flowing rivers. Tanks will raise clouds of dust as they move across desert terrain. Jet fighters will execute tight banking turns as they engage a target. Most impressive are the super-weapons, like the Chinese Nuclear missile, or the GLA Scud Missiles.

The most glaring downsides to this game are the portrayal of the GLA as your stereotypical Arab terrorist. This may be particularly offensive to members of the Arab community, with
its (hopefully) unintended racial stereotyping. The apocalyptic end cutscene of the GLA campaign will certainly not help matters.

In addition, some users have reported compatiblity problems while running Generals on their PC's. Please check the internet to ensure that your PC is compatible with the game. Also, be warned that this game does require an extremely fast PC. I have an Athlon 2000+ XP with 512MB RAM and a 64MB GEForce4 videocard, and I can run the game in 1024x768 on high detail. Anything less than this, and you may have problems.

Other than this, Generals is an excellent game. Yes, other than the updated graphics it doesn't present any revolutionary innovations to the RTS genre. However, for those of us who enjoy the fast pace that the C&C games provide, this is a perfect addition to the series.

Although the impact of Generals will not be as great as the original Tiberian Dawn or Red Alert, Generals is still one of the most polished entries in the series.

Generals system spec

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 10 / 13
Date: February 03, 2003
Author: Amazon User

Just wanted to clear up the rumors about high system specs needed to run the game.

The minimum system requirements are an 800MHz Intel CPU, 128 megs of RAM and a GeForce 2 graphics card.

This minimum system spec will run the game fine and if you have a higher rated CPU, more memory, and newer graphics card, you will get better looking graphics and faster performance.

Recommeded system specs are 1.8GHz CPU, with 256 megs of RAM, and a Geforce3 or equivalent graphics card.

The game ships mid-February so the reviews here are posted about the multiplayer test that EA released during November.

The first reviews of the final product come out from France and Germany and rate the game as 90+ game. More official reviews coming soon from US.

Great game, if you have a great computer

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 9 / 12
Date: February 13, 2003
Author: Amazon User

The Generals is finally here! The game is a load of fun, if you have a good computer. I have a AMD 1600+, 640 DDR RAM, Radeon 7000 64MB DDR, and it runs fine, but only on the lowest detail settings.
The game itself is a lot like the old C&C only with 3-D acceleration. The graphics are considerably better and you have an interesting choice of groups to control. Is it just me or is the GLA Al-Queda?
If you love the older C&C you should really consider buying this game.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next 

Actions