User Reviews (1 - 11 of 53)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Very racist, bloated, and not made by Westwood

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 3 / 39
Date: October 13, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Warning! This game is extremely racist! If you are a fan of Westwood's other games, like Dune 2, Dune 2000, Emperor, etc. and like playing the Noble Atreides so you can side with the Fremen, you will really not like this game!
If you hate arabs, and to a lesser extent, asians, then you might like this game.
This game isn't actually made by Westwood, and it shows. Not just in the racism, but many things about this game feel different.
Also the system requirements for this game are ridiculous. It requires loads of hard disk space and a very fast machine. Definately not a game for those with old computers.
I loved all the other Command & Conquer games, but this one I uninstalled fairly quickly.

Great Gameplay but Extremely Buggy

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 0 / 2
Date: December 17, 2006
Author: Amazon User

The game itself is one of the most fun RTS's I have ever played. It's not extremely imbalanced and the graphics are very pleasing to the eye.

The reason I gave the overall game 1 star is becuase of the poor technical quality. The minimum system requirements are an 800 MHz processor, 128 MB of RAM, and a 32 MB video card (GeForce 2 or higher).

I have a 2.4 GHz processor, 1024 MB of RAM, and a 256 MB GeForce FX 5500. Should be able to run the game smoothly, but even on lowest settings and resolution I get extremely poor framerates and occasional crashes to desktop. Usually 5-10 minutes into a game the fps drops to 5-10 and it's impossible to play. EA has stopped supporting this game so there are no patches to fix this issue that a lot of people seem to be having. Do not buy this game, even if your computer should be able to handle it.

My name is James

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 3 / 49
Date: October 19, 2005
Author: Amazon User

This Game is sooo bad. The movement speed of infantry is the speed of a snail crossing over russia! The US troops look like they either have blue skin or they are wearing VERY tite clothes. Ahhhhhhh! The game has a glith and it built a plumber and not a GLA freedom fighter. Oh no it's the same for their pickup's with the machine guns on the back. The rocket dudes take like ten thousand hits to destroy a tank. Oh and the tank fires it's cannon at the infantry (takes about five minutes to kill one like this) Why dosen't the tank fire a machine gun? Oh yeah look at the size of the chinese nukes, can;t they even destroy the enemy command centre? And why is the rocket buggy so small? Smaller than those pickups and the "plumbers". Why do the civilian buildings have more life than military buildings! Oh and the civilian cars are quite small smaller than the civilians themselves! And how can a flash bang grenade kill someone, shouldn't it just parlyze them. Oh yeah a jet fighter can't even destroy one lousy GLA tank! I get promoted and choose these pathfinders/snipers they kill in one hit have a rappid fire rate and are invisble, cool! THe enemy now has these ahhhhhh my infantry are all dying and I haven't a clue of where the enemys are! Everything about the game is wrong but for tank vs tank and sometimes person vs person. And there is this one AK47 upgrade for the angry mobs they are not AK's there Uzis. And since when did terrorists use uzis. And the ccuds, a missle the size of a FedEx truck can't destroy a building and sometimes can't even desroy a tank. THen when you fire the missle another suddenly appears in it's place! Why not go back to some supply place in your base to get another missle. There is wvwn a limited amount of supplys and even lasers can't kill a person. People are like the terminaters that can only be killed by another person or get run over, while on the other hand they can only kill other people. And when you destroy a building it just shatters into a couple of shards hardly enough to even rebuild one twentyith of the structure. OK enough critisism time for good things.

No soldiers running around like swearing phyco maniacs like on WarCraft III. People don't always fall into the same death pose every time like every time the soldier falls on his back with arms extended (only exception GLA pickups and rocket buggys). You have lots of cool upgrades and abilitys and amazing vehicle and envirornmental graphics. The civilian buildings are strangly more realistic than the military. You can run over smaller vehicles with the bigger ones. THe GLA have this cool scrap and salvage ability for their vihicles where you can pickup the remains of a destroyed vehicle to upgrade your own to better weapons, veterancy or give you money.

Over all this game is not so good but not at all offenceive so a ten year old can play. (some of these ESRB ratigs are wrong like in Dawn of War)

The campaign has about seven missions for each team. And in skirmish mode you can earn these medals for things like beating all the maps in hard/normal/easy. You can gain promotions for killing more units to unlock new abilitys and units.

You will love this game at first then you will get sooooo bored (replay ability is too good so you play too much the first day and can't play anymore cause you did everything on the second so you uninstall the game)

I'm the same person who wrote the previous reveiw on the plumbers.

This doesn't go with the C&C series.

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 4 / 29
Date: July 03, 2004
Author: Amazon User

It's a pretty good game but it takes place no where in the C&C series. I have every C&C game except for Covert Ops, Counter-strike, and Retaliation. Generals doesn't seem to fit in between C&C and Red Alert. It is years above Red Alert and a few years behind Command & Conquer, which doesn't make sense because the tiberian meteor was supposed to hit earth sometime then. And what happened to the Allies, Soviets, GDI, and Nod? GDI was formed before the meteor so instead of USA, China, and GLA it should be GDI against some other side maybe even GLA. It's a pretty good game as I said above but you would need a very, very fast computer to play without annoyance. I gave it two stars for a cool war game. I would have given it more stars if it was in the C&C storyline.

stargazed28

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 13
Date: April 28, 2005
Author: Amazon User

this game does not live up to westwood studio quality at all!
EA can keep it. constantly lagging, not good story lines, and no james earl jones. but it looks cool! but, looks aren't everything.

THe Game?

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 2 / 31
Date: October 14, 2005
Author: Amazon User

This Game is sooo bad. The movement speed of infantry is the speed of a snail crossing over russia! The US troops look like they either have blue skin or they are wearing VERY tite clothes. Ahhhhhhh! The game has a glith and it built a plumber and not a GLA freedom fighter. Oh no it's the same for their pickup's with the machine guns on the back. The rocket dudes take like ten thousand hits to destroy a tank. Oh and the tank fires it's cannon at the infantry (takes about five minutes to kill one like this) Why dosen't the tank fire a machine gun? Oh yeah look at the size of the chinese nukes, can;t they even destroy the enemy command centre? And why is the rocket buggy so small? Smaller than those pickups and the "plumbers". Why do the civilian buildings have more life than military buildings! Oh and the civilian cars are quite small smaller than the civilians themselves! And how can a flash bang grenade kill someone, shouldn't it just parlyze them. Oh yeah a jet fighter can't even destroy one lousy GLA tank! I get promoted and choose these pathfinders/snipers they kill in one hit have a rappid fire rate and are invisble, cool! THe enemy now has these ahhhhhh my infantry are all dying and I haven't a clue of where the enemys are! Everything about the game is wrong but for tank vs tank and sometimes person vs person. And there is this one AK47 upgrade for the angry mobs they are not AK's there Uzis. And since when did terrorists use uzis. And the ccuds, a missle the size of a FedEx truck can't destroy a building and sometimes can't even desroy a tank. THen when you fire the missle another suddenly appears in it's place! Why not go back to some supply place in your base to get another missle. There is wvwn a limited amount of supplys and even lasers can't kill a person. People are like the terminaters that can only be killed by another person or get run over, while on the other hand they can only kill other people. And when you destroy a building it just shatters into a couple of shards hardly enough to even rebuild one twentyith of the structure. OK enough critisism time for good things.

No soldiers running around like swearing phyco maniacs like on WarCraft III. People don't always fall into the same death pose every time like every time the soldier falls on his back with arms extended (only exception GLA pickups and rocket buggys). You have lots of cool upgrades and abilitys and amazing vehicle and envirornmental graphics. The civilian buildings are strangly more realistic than the military. You can run over smaller vehicles with the bigger ones. THe GLA have this cool scrap and salvage ability for their vihicles where you can pickup the remains of a destroyed vehicle to upgrade your own to better weapons, veterancy or give you money.

Over all this game is not so good but not at all offenceive so a ten year old can play. (some of these ESRB ratigs are wrong like in Dawn of War)

Disappointing gameplay

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 1 / 6
Date: July 12, 2005
Author: Amazon User

First off, my introduction to the Command & Conquer world was Red Alert 2 and its expansion, Yuri's Revenge. I've been playing real-time strategy (RTS) games since Warcraft 2. What I loved about Red Alert 2: simplified resource gathering; good mix of military units, but not so many types of units to be overwhelming (like in Medieval: Total War); good pathfinding by units: you click on where you want units to go and can trust that the game AI will figure out how to get them there; waypoints: the ability to set units on a predetermined path; good unit selection options (all units on screen, all units on map, all combat units); good unit production queuing system. Can you tell Red Alert 2 is one of my favorite games ever, RTS or otherwise?

Unfortunately, the Generals game interface has lost many of the features that made Red Alert 2 so effortless and enjoyable to play. For example, once you group units together in a task force (eg. ctrl-1, you create "Task Force 1"), there's no way to tell how many units, or even what type of units you have in that task force. Pathfinding has taken a big step backwards. If you have two groups of units crossing paths (especially tanks), you can expect massive traffic jams, especially if the groups have numerous units. Resource gathering is quite slow, especially for the US, and there's really no way to speed it up. In Red Alert 2, you could always build more ore gatherers, and ore fields would still offer a trickle of ore once the bulk of the ore was harvested. In Generals, if you're playing the US, only one helicopter (maybe two) can be tasked on a supply drop at a time, and once the supplies are gone, they're gone.

What's good about the game? The overall concept -- the technologically advanced USA vs. the mass unit swarming Chinese army vs. the (Al Qaeda inspired?) terrorist Global Liberation Army (GLA). The three sided rock-paper-scissors concept is still a strong one (witness Starcraft). Pretty cool unit abilities -- I especially like the ability to capture an enemy's building, and US vehicles' ability to create drones. I also like the idea that as you destroy more enemy units, you unlock different Generals abilities. However, the concept can't cover up the poor gameplay interface. All in all, a big step back for Westwood.

Same ol' same ol'

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 1
Date: January 16, 2007
Author: Amazon User

Westwood's Red Alert was a lot of fun back in the day. I was hoping that Generals would be equally as fun for its time. However, with no fmv to reward me for my accomplishments, this game falls short. There is really no incentive to buy this game over anything made in the 90's, except slightly better graphics.

The AI is gross as well. Having a group of tanks move in to take out a bunker is like pulling teeth. If there is a small obstical in the way, they won't move around it, and one guy will try to go in while the rest decide it's not possible.

It's one of the many games that feels like EA just shoved out the door as quick as they could to make a quick buck.

Awesome game... if you're an idiot.

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 0 / 0
Date: April 03, 2008
Author: Amazon User

This goes to show you, if you buy an older game, you are most likely going to be astonished by how bad they can be. Not that Generals is a total loss, but if you want anything close to a thinking strategy game, look someplace else. The campaign mode is tedious and the solo player skirmishes are basically nothing more than a "see who can build their stuff first" race. I guess this is realistic though, since most of the military conflicts in history consisted of both sides trying to build a full military base while the enemy is sending in tanks. What makes it worse is the suicidal mentality of your army's AI. Many a time will you lose your builder trucks simply because they either just sit there when being attacked or decide to rush into the middle of a battle to fix a structure even though the structure automatically fixes itself. The only warning you get is an almost subliminal alarm that goes of a thousand times per minute and quickly becomes no more than part of the overall din of battle. And if you do hear it, don't bother trying to save the truck. By the time the alarm actually goes off, the unit is pretty much dead already anyway. It is kind of like a "come watch me die" theme song. I can't imagine these flaws couldn't have been fixed relatively easily by simply making a timer before any attacks and being able to set a checkpoint for non-combat units that are under fire. However, if you are dedicated enough to work through the first half of a skirmish, you will be rewarded by fighting an enemy that completely gives up in the second half, save for small waves of assaults that mysteriously become only a fraction of the original efforts. I can't see much improvement over the original Red Alert games that preceded Generals. The graphics aren't much better, the AI is equally as autistic and strategy is pretty much the same. On a positive note, the game does add some good units, like the combat Chinook and sniper. But overall, if you were frustrated by the Bozo the Clown mentality of the early Command and Conquer games, you will be equally dismayed by the exact same stuff here.

HA! Not as good as the old one

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 2 / 6
Date: August 12, 2005
Author: Amazon User

This game would be far better if the resources lasted more than an hour. I like to take my time playing a game, build up your forces and attack, but use a strategy. This game requires you to move quick, build your tanks up as fast as possible and attack because when you are done you will not have any more resourses coming in. The AI is horible, it focuses so much on attacking you first thing in the game that before you are done building up your base they have run out of money. NO joke all you have to do is wait for the AI to attack and then send some troops to their base, knowing that they don't have the money to build more troops. I give this 3 stars because the multiplayer seems to be the only reason I play the game.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next 

Actions