User Reviews (1 - 11 of 13)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Addictive game

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 0 / 0
Date: February 25, 2006
Author: Amazon User

It seems well designed to me, realistic graphics and sound, lots of choices, interesting sets. My only complaint is that there are only 3 levels- normal, hard and brutal. A third somewhere between hard and brutal would have been nice.

"The Best Game Ever"

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 0 / 5
Date: March 21, 2004
Author: Amazon User

This game is the best game I have ever played. I played it on the PC and It is great. I can't wait for this game to come to the mac. I love war games and I played a lot of war games and this is my favorite war game ever.

Command & Conquer Generals Zero Hour

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 0 / 4
Date: September 18, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Very Well done Much better then the first installment.

Great Game...with flaws

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 1 / 3
Date: December 26, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Overall this was a solid RTS and a solid game. The missions are prettu fun but they can get repetative. The graphics are awsome and my low end eMAc 1.25 runs the game fine. The only big flaw is the AI which is bad, really bad. Besides that this game is awsome and great fun.

Demo review, be warned

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 4
Date: April 11, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Might be slow. Be warned, I played the Demo on my Power book G4 12 inch (with 1Ghz processor and 1.25GB RAM). It ran fine, just slow. Also, the graphics aren't as good as Warcraft III. I think you would need a G5 to play this and enjoy it, so perhaps this is one for the Hard Core C&C fans out there.

runs ok for me

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 2 / 3
Date: May 24, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Bought it after playing the demo. it runs well even on my eMac 700, but i do have it maxed out. 160GB Hard Drive and a Gig of memory. note to anyone with same type of machine/processor who wants to buy this game, set all the graphics to the lowest settings. you still get decent eye candy, but i did notice that with the factory setting, the building construction seems cooler on highest and lowest settings. also, when you use the ultimate weapon for either team, you don't see the Big explosion, but for me on loss. I bought it for the amount of thinking you need to do.

Way too High!

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 3 / 5
Date: May 02, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Well... while C&CG is a solid game... it has major faults, the first being the requirments being far too high. My 800 Mhz can barely run it (yes, technicly the game needs 1 Ghz.. but that is insane, as the 800 i have is still a top notch machine), and my dads 1 Ghz machine is not much better (and is less than a month or two old).
As for the game itself... while the graphics are nice, gameplay solid, the AI sucks... not even providing a challange for me on the highest settings. However, multiplayer is a redeming factor, saving the game.

C&C lives on!

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: April 14, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Command and Conquer: Generals is a great game and I'm glad to say the game lives up to the C&C name. Fans of the series will enjoy the simular gameplay but you don't have to be a fan to enjoy Generals. For those of you who are worried it might not be the same since Westwoods name isn't on the box (developer of past C&C games) worry not since Westwood is a part of Electronic Arts.

The interface is slightly different but works out nicely. Instead of having every building option available to you at once, the options for each building become available when you click on them. Another nice change to Generals is the 3D environment. Being able to rotate the camera and zoom in and out is a nice feature to have, especially if your units go behind buildings and you hate the colored shadows that show up to let you know where they are.

There are a few things that I miss from the previous C&C games. There arn't any naval units so if you wanted to blast your enemies base away from off shore with Tomahawk missles, you'll have to keep dreaming. Another thing they took away are the cinimatic live action movies for the storyline missions...in fact, there really isn't much of a storyline at all. I've played a few of the storyline missions and they are pretty fun so far, however, it would have been nice if they had kept the live action movies. from C&C games past.

Overall, I think anyone who is either familiar with the C&C games or likes RTS games should definatly check Command and Conquer Generals out.

Not your daddy's Red Alert

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 5 / 5
Date: May 26, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Pretty much an entirely new story line and a different universe in this one, so if you're looking for GDI vs NOD action it isn't here. That being said, this is the best looking RTS I've seen, and the gameplay is good and the resource gathering mechanisms are rather simple (i.e. you don't need 9 different elements to build a tank).

One thing to note is that if you're like me and want to beat up on the computer in skirmish mode (custom game configuration where you can take on between 1 and 7 computer controlled opponents) it will slow down if you crank up the number of opponents and the skill level at which they play (I'm on 2x2.3Ghz G5, Radeon X800, 2.5G RAM). The one good thing that can be said about this is that while it does slow down in the heat of battle things keep moving fairly smoothly whereas with my PC version the game begins to stutter and get very frustrating.

Systems Requirements Overstated

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 8 / 9
Date: February 13, 2005
Author: Amazon User

I play this game on my recently purchased iMac G4 with an 800MHz processor and 512MB of RAM and have not had any problems whatsoever. The box states the requirements are a 1GHz processor. This is an overstatement of the requirements in my opinion. I had a Windows computer with a 1GHz processor and played the PC version and I do not see any difference in the game performances. The MAC version functions very well with an 800MHz processor.

Review Page: 1 2 Next 

Actions