I think this is more of a RPG or FPS than an rts. the whole tank shoots at mouse pointer seems odd. I prefer RA3 for small scale tacticals, thanks you very much. However, supcomm is the way to go for RTS. Huge scale, well designed, and supcom 2 comes out in a few years. If your pc can handle it

QUOTECommand & Conquer: Red Alert 3 is, in a way, not a direct sequel to the events of Red Alert 2. See, after Albert Einstein went back in time to kill Hitler, inadvertently creating an alternate time line in which the Allies are battling the Soviets for control of Europe, the Soviets, facing defeat, have gone back in time to kill Einstein and remove his history-changing inventions (like the A-bomb) from the equation. This creates an alternate-alternate time line in which the Soviets were winning until the Empire of the Rising Sun came out of nowhere to claim world domination for Japan. (Also, in this time line Allied commando Tanya is blonde for some reason.) Does it make a lick of sense? No. Is it a fantastically over-the-top story that perfectly sets the tone for a huge battle with equally absurd units? Absolutely.ENDQUOTE

This is the first paragraph. It doesn't say anything that's necessarily inaccurate, but it needs to be pointed out that this consumes a whopping 20% of the entire article, and what is it? A plot summary with a little bit of fluff. I thought a review was supposed to, you know, REVIEW the product, not waste time with a history lesson. If you need to summarize the plot, then link to a preview or something. Reviewers have to keep their reviews short (in this case, it's under 800 words) in order to maintain user attention. That's sad in its own right, but when you waste 20% of your "allotted" words on basic facts that you could have linked to, there's something wrong....

QUOTE No one can accuse Red Alert 3’s graphics of not being bright and colorful enough, though it’s fair to say the gameplay may be too fast-paced for its own good. Why bother with notifications that your units are under attack when by the time you hear them and figure out where the attack happened, your troops are probably already dead? I also have the same problem here that I do with all C&C games: you can’t zoom out in any meaningful way. But any game in which a giant laser cannon pops out of Teddy Roosevelt’s head on Mt. Rushmore is a winner in my book.ENDQUOTE

1. This isn't SupCom. There's no need to zoom out. Just think about it. Use some simple logic. Maps are small, army scale is small, what POSSIBLE good would being able to zoom out do for this game? Not being able to zoom out is something you should be accustomed to in C&C games, meaning playing without zoom should be second nature. Why a non C&C player is reviewing a C&C game is beyond me.

2. Too fast paced????? LOL. RA3 is probably the slowest paced C&C game ever made. Not that that's a bad thing, but I'd just like to point out that saying it's "too fast-paced" is like saying the speed of light is slow. It's not a matter of opinion. It's a FACT that RA3 has slower production and combat pacing than any C&C game prior to it. If that's still "too fast paced", then I must question the point of your playing RTS games. Saying things like that in a review is frightening actually. It's a reflection of the sad state of the genre where everything is being slowed down and dumbed down at the expense of people who are capable of handling more.

3. Why bother with notifications? Because there's this massive plastic button on your keyboard called the space key. It gets you to the notification instantly. It would be useful to know such things before you make statements like that, because it actually has an impact on the validity of your complaint. It's a given that if you actually knew that, or could play the game at a competent level, then there would be no need for that sentence.

4. The last sentence cracks me up. Yeah that's right. Any game with frickin' lasers is a winner! Yeah ok MiniMe God forbid gameplay, puzzle solving, and interesting challenges make it into the winner's circle along with your lasers (absolutely NONE of which were mentioned in your review, other than complaining about the fact that they make the game "too fast" for you)

This review has about as much substance as ass vapor, and I have to wonder exactly WHAT the justification for the 92% score actually is. 92% is fine (I'm not complaining about the score), so long as it's actually backed by something more substantial than "Lasers FTW"

Verdict? FAIL.

Many thanks to AGM launcher for original text