I picked up Command and Conquer 3 this past weekend after playing the demo for only an hour or two. I just assumed my computer wouldn’t be able to run it after seeing how awesome the screen shots looked on various gaming websites. Wrong.
EA has done a top-notch job of scaling the game way back (in visual scale) so that it runs perfect on older hardware. And why shouldn’t they? EA is in this business to make a profit so why cut out a potential market segment? My guess is that EA could only have justified putting in the extra work to scale back the graphics because there was a significant market in the ‘low-end’ PC gaming population. While I’m not exactly proud to be in that demographic I am pleased that they took the extra effort to include it.
The game itself is incredibly fun. It’s everything you would expect from the C&C franchise. Playing a game that has full-motion cut scenes almost has a nostalgic feel to it since so few studios actually spend the money it. Sure, the acting isn’t going to win any awards but watching Billy Dee Williams look at the camera and give me a pep-talk is flippin’ sweet. Check out the cast list they’ve put together.
The game mechanics are well done and I’m still just starting out so I can’t quite yet report on all of the aspects (namely multiplayer) of the game. All of the standard RTS controls apply and it’s easy to just pick up and go if you have had even a passing encounter with any popular RTS before.
My only beef so far is the same that I had with C&C: Generals. The camera always feels to zoomed in. I’d love to have the camera pulled back just a bit further so I can see more of the landscape on my screen. I don’t like having to scroll while I’m within my base just to access the various structures build queues.
I’m very eager to learn more about the 3rd race (which looks alien) that is available in the game….is it time to go home and play yet? 
Where is his Colt .45 ?
Comments