As of now, during this period of my life, I'm not a very hardcore gamer. I want to be, but parents.....

Anyway, what's wrong with C&C3? I've played the others and I have fun playing C&C3. I know it's like the others, but...I dunno.

C&C 3 is just as good as the other C&C titles. Wherever you heard that it was crap has a problem.

Well CnC3 is one of those catch 22's.

One the one hand you have their single player campaign. I have to admit I enjoyed it. The cut scenes are great, a whole bunch of celebrity cameos. The story was above par for an RTS and there was enough diversity in the missions to keep me playing.

One the other hand you have multi player. Now this is where most of the criticism comes from. I'm a hardcore gamer...I play in tournaments all the time...and when it comes to RTS, the multi player is a deal breaker for me.

I played through the entire Beta and for a good two months after release. Personally, I don't like their setup, but that may just be me. What gets most of the hardcores are the plethora of bugs, and huge wait period for patches to fix them. Patches that routinely fall short.

On top of that you have the redundant game play. Unlike other RTS titles of late, which I won't name for fear of derailing the thread, CnC3 online lacks any real depth or strategy. Despite claims of balance, you still see the same strats over and over..and if you don't use them, you lose. The old "one unit spam" was a big problem for a while. And while I have often defended rush tactics, the omnipresence of it in CnC3 really kills the repeat play appeal for me. Besides a few variations, I see the same units coming at me again and again. No change up, no use of the other 75% of the units available.

Some people call it just an update of all the other CnC games, rather than anything new. Personally, and most of my gaming friends agree, Generals had far better gameplay.

With each patch they seem to fix one bug or balance issue and replace it with another. Engi rushing, tower spam etc...1.9 apparently has some change up for the economy which will probably lead to harvester spam and super eco booming...

The game is not crap by any means...but it just fails to get enough things right to satisfy a great deal of players. Now as a casual gamer I'm sure the game is just great, and I don't begrudge anyone for having fun...that is the point of gaming after all.

Now I have been out of the game for a while now so my facts may be outdated, but that is why I don't play any more.

Oh and I have noticed that most of the older gamers are the ones who dislike it, while the 18 and under crowd loves it. Not sure if that has anything to do with it...

*Waits for the fanboys to muster their forces...*

C&C3 was great, but the units hat zero character compared to the previous games. It lost a lot of its design yummyness. Still a great RTS.

The online for C&C3 felt very "first to zerg wins" and the only way to counter a zerg was to zerg faster. and the ground units were for the most part useless in a big fight because the vehicles and air stomped all over them. Did anyone else think that the Scrin were the bastard child of the Protoss and Zerg of starcraft :P

Well, although I really prefer RTS games like supreme commander, C&C 3 is a pretty fun diversion if you don't mind the relative lack of depth. The C&C games have always been great though.

I really like cnc3 great game

if they named it what it was... C@C generals: crystal wars.

I had hoped it would go back to a more classic style of gameplay where there were truly unique units and defenses that had to be stratigically placed, and a super weapon that didn't mean an instant win.