This group contains a lot of stuff of the C&C community. Mod news, game screen shots and C&C humor(funny c&c moments). Join us if your a great fan of C&C!

  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
RSS feed Report content What the Press is saying about C&C (view original)
What the Press is saying about C&C
view previous next
Share Image
Share on Facebook Tweet Email a friend
Embed Image
Post comment Comments
Jason_Zombolt Mar 7 2013 says:

prepare for hate in 3...2...1...

+4 votes     reply to comment
crusader148 Mar 7 2013 replied:

The hate is pretty well earned, CnC 4 is a depressing black mark on the entire franchise and more or less a slap to the face for all fans. EA deserves to have every single new next CnC game given a critical glare because, people are tired of having good things completely ruined.

+19 votes     reply to comment
BigCheese256 Creator
BigCheese256 Mar 8 2013 replied:

^ This.

+11 votes   reply to comment
Jason_Zombolt Mar 12 2013 replied:

Yet CnC4 was not that bad. Not the best game but not a "Black Mark" The Westwood successors petrogryph lauded during the TT bashing have a worst track than EA at the moment. So I do not see how CnC is Ruined by one game.

Or is this DMC New Dante's fault?

-2 votes     reply to comment
crusader148 Mar 14 2013 replied:

Man no matter what light you put CnC4 in it's bad, it was a **** tier game to the series that COMPLETLY jumped away from what made a CnC a CnC game. It is most DEFINITELY a black mark in the entirety of command and conquer. EA could have been alright if they didn't put it underneath the CnC name and perhaps released it underneath a different one. Although after rolling in a good chunk of cash and getting some fan faith,they then turned around and cashed in on the CnC name and more or less ****** the fans.

I didn't imply that CnC was ruined by one game just that because of CnC4 every new game should be given a critical look because people don't want to get ****** over again and get their hopes up for nothing but grief.

Petrogryph and their implied bad track record.
Because Universe at War, Empire at War, and End of Nations were totally bad games? Lol how bout no.

+5 votes     reply to comment
The_Freedom_Fighter Mar 8 2013 says:

Did anyone checked out Petroglyph's new game? A part of me kinda died when I checked it out. Ex-Westwood my ***. They're not even close to what they were before :/ Love it or hate it, (with exception of CnC4) EA's CnC has been pretty consistent with WW's, gameplay-wise.

And now the drones will fire bomb me to hell and back. INCOMING!!

+4 votes     reply to comment
Darth-Chaching Mar 8 2013 replied:

Well Red Alert 3 deviated a little from the norm to be fair... But I would agree for the most part gameplay's been the same.
But for me the best thing about C&C has always been the story and in my opinion, without question, WW's stories were superior to EA's.

+2 votes     reply to comment
SoraZ Mar 8 2013 replied:

RA3 was at least good, unlike that mindless megaspamfest called TW or that not-a-CnC CnC TT.

+2 votes     reply to comment
Darth-Chaching Mar 8 2013 replied:

That's why I said "for the most part".
I didn't really like RA3 tbh, I found it more entertaining than TW though. I liked the addition of a third faction in each to try and add a bit more diversity and the mechanics for Scrin and the Rising Sun worked well enough I suppose(though I really wanted more than what we got). One of my biggest complaints since EA's complete take over though is that, without mods, their titles go stale very quickly and for me, it's because of a lackluster campaign. Multiplayer has it's importance too but I'm sure we all still go back and play WW's campaigns, for many different reasons, but my primary one is the story, something I fell EA's never been able to match.
(Let's not even mention TT, everyone knows it's one of the worst games ever, nothing more needs to be said about it)

+2 votes     reply to comment
WinterPwNd^ Mar 10 2013 replied:

Tiberium Wars was far more better than RA3 imo. Ra 3 was missing units, abilities were added and those point stuff that you can call a bomber or whateverdafuqyoucallit completley ruined it (atleast they should cost money like in TW)

+1 vote     reply to comment
BioDestroyer Mar 8 2013 says:

Well, we can't forget that those reviews were selected by EA to help advertise their game, so if there were some with complains they probably wouldn't use those.

I was hoping that Petroglyph would eventually go back to the roots and make games like the Westwood's C&C once they got more funds, let's hope it happens after Victory.

+1 vote     reply to comment
GriffinZ Mar 8 2013 replied:

actually i thought the quotes was joke:

"I'm excited."

+2 votes     reply to comment
OrangeNero Mar 8 2013 replied:

why should we not be excited? If at all I'd question GamesRadar for feeling at home in a F2P.

+1 vote     reply to comment
triadbanger07. May 30 2013 says:

nice info

+1 vote     reply to comment
Post a comment

You are not logged in, your comment will be anonymous unless you join the community. Or sign in with your social account:


Click here for the list of reviews

Mar 7th, 2013
Embed Thumb
RSS feed