To create your free account, please enter your email address and password below. Please ensure your email is correct as you will recieve a validation email before you can login.

Email:
Nickname:
Password:
Confirm Password:
Weekly newsletter:
Daily newsletter:

To log in to your account, please enter your email address and password below:

Email:
Password:
Forgot your password?

To reset your password, please enter your email address below and we will send you a link to reset it.

Email:
Submitted by Chris Leyton on March 22 2010 - 12:28

Big changes and flashy visuals can't avoid Kane's legacy ending on a whimper...

Considering that Tiberian Twilight marks the final installment of Kane's story in Command & Conquer, the team at EA LA certainly haven't shied away from introducing sweeping changes to the format that has more and less governed the series for the past 15 years.  Typically we're big supporters of originality and there can be no doubting that Command & Conquer 4 achieves this, but in this particular case we're inclined to wish they hadn't been so drastic.

Set 10 years after the events of Kane's Wrath, Tiberian Twilight finds the world at the brink of near collapse, consumed by the ravenous effect of Tiberium and the conflicts surrounding its control.  Standing on the brink of disaster, Kane contemplates the one thing previously considered unthinkable, an alliance with the GDI, forming the Tiberium Control Network to safely harness the benefits of the deadly yet powerful source of energy.  Of course such an amicable agreement wouldn't exactly be the fitting conclusion to Kane's story, and so over the course of the game's single-player campaign we discover Nod separatists and corrupt officials hell-bent on bringing further conflict.

The abundance of Tiberium is a convenient means for the team at EALA to introduce the most drastic change to the format.  After 15 years of sending Harvesters to fields ripe with Tiberium and dotingly watching them return safely to the refinery, EALA has decided now is the time to remove that element from the game completely.  Adopting a structure similar to Relic Entertainment's Dawn of War series and Massive's World in Conflict, Tiberian Twilight replaces the concept of resources with the introduction of a cap on unit production.  Smaller units cost less, but the change typically means you'll rarely have more than 10-12 units under your control.  While the decision allows the game to focus immediately on the battles and action, the switch leaves Tiberian Twilight feeling quite unlike any Command & Conquer that has before it.

Resource harvesting isn't the only thing deemed superfluous by the team at EALA.  The initial process of setting up a base and defences has been removed entirely.  Evidently, EA LA decided such concepts, which constituted the early processes, clogged up the game and decided to streamline the experience to cut straight to the chase.  Instead the changes are geared around the introduction of the Crawler, an 'all-in-one' mobile base that allows you to advance across the battlefield as the tides of the conflict change and dictate.  Each stage begins with the choice of selecting between Offense, Defence and Support classes, each of which offer varying tactical options, units and techniques to choose between.  This illusion of choice seems to be little more then that, and perhaps an option that's better served when playing the campaign in Co-Op.  The Defensive class offers the closest Tiberian Twilight gets to base building with a limited range of turrets to place on the surrounding area and focuses on Infantry.  Support seems to be largely the domain of the Co-Op, while Offensive offers the most balanced **.  Although the concept has its merits, we found the overall idea lacked a sense of development and never really encouraged us to move beyond employing one class, typically the Offensive unit.

There's a number of pitfalls that Tiberian Twilight falls into as a result of these changes.  The level cap imposes a tendency to just form a relatively small battalion and move this across the battlefield, completing objectives as they occur.  As a result, it's a game that focuses on one conflict at a time instead of orchestrating larger, more detailed strategies.  The change is also evident in maps that feel considerably smaller than previous C&C titles, and battles that are more intimate than the grand conflicts featured in previous titles.  The focus on smaller unit groups and battles is further demonstrated by the camera, which sits pretty low to the action.  Although this highlights the visual splendour of the game, it restricts the ability of employing larger scale tactics and heightens the sense that you're just moving between objectives with a small group of units.  It also means there's an inability to tank-rush to any satisfactory effect - shocking!  Simply put, Tiberian Twilight is not the Command & Conquer that we all know and love.

The whole concept of a 'persistent experience' constitutes an RPG influenced system of unlocking new units and techniques with experience gained on the battlefield and collecting Tiberium Crystals.  We'd argue that it's better demonstrated through the draconian online setup that requires a 'persistent' online connection just to get the game running, even if you're intending just to play the single-player mode.  It's a setup we're thoroughly opposed to, and should be noted by anybody contemplating playing a quick mission on the bus or otherwise away from an internet connection.  The setup also has further drawbacks, as there's a considerable amount of material to grind through just to unlock the more advanced units and technology that comes later in the game.

Command & Conquer fans eager to discover revelations are in for further disappointment.
In terms of story, the promised conclusion to Kane's story is largely underwhelming and lacking in terms of genuine revelations; major themes are left unanswered and important characters forgotten.  It's not particularly the noteworthy send-off that Kane really deserves, but something tells us Kane's ascension isn't the final word.  Although the FMV sections are of a high quality, many of the new actor's are insanely irritating (the playable character's wife in particular) and the attempt to improve C&C's customary hammy overtones leaves the sections feeling as though they're trying to achieve something they're definitely not.

Ultimately, Tiberian Twilight feels like a game that has been rushed to the shelves as once Kane's end is finally revealed there's a distinct lack of content to fall back on.  The lack of a Scrin campaign can be conveniently explained by the Nod/GDI alliance, but ultimately leaves the game's Nod and GDI campaigns, consisting of seven missions, largely underwhelming and over pretty quickly.  Considering Tiberium Wars featured three different factions and significantly more missions, the feeling that Tiberian Twilight is a little on the brief side is an overriding feeling that's hard to shake.  The Skirmish mode, typically the legs of a Command & Conquer title, offers game types of up to 5 vs 5, but only supports Domination as a game type and 10 maps to choose between.  That said, multiplayer is undeniably the highlight of the game and still manages to provide an intense and immediate experience that builds upon the series' heritage.

If you wish to link to this article, here's a permalink to this page:

  • Graphics: 84%
     
  • Sound: 80%
     
  • Gameplay: 72%
     
  • Originality: 82%
     
  • Longevity: 62%
     
Overall Score: 7/10
Tiberium Wars was actually a fairly decent attempt at resurrecting Westwood's series, so you have to ask why has it gone so wrong? Tiberian Twilight is little more than a mish-mash of ideas from other RTS games, and looses C&C's identity in the process. Why the studio decided to implement such drastic changes with the final chapter in Kane's story is beyond us, surely it would have been a smarter idea to introduce new concepts in the next saga.

TVG Store - Finding you the cheapest price for:

Command & Conquer 4: Tiberian Twilight

Comment

Sign Up and Post with a Profile

Join TVG for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member. You can still post anonymously.

Log in using Facebook

Respect Other Members

Please respect other users, post wisely and avoid flaming... Terms & Conditions

 

Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • Next
User avatar
By: Anonymous

Added:Fri 17th Feb 2012 14:27, Post No: 13

this game was screwed up by halo wars, you know the game that sucked and got 82 on metacritic, if it had been on ps3 it would have been so much better.

xbox 360 sucks.


User avatar
By: MrDanz

Added:Mon 13th Feb 2012 23:43, Post No: 12

How to download ?


User avatar
By: Anonymous

Added:Sat 18th Dec 2010 20:46, Post No: 11

The old C&C games were awesome, I don't understand how they screwed the whole series up. I liked Red Alert the most and for some reason they took a good idea of an alternate reality that was reminiscent to how people during WWII and in the early cold war wanted to make fantastical superweapons to crush the other side. But then they just went absurd with all of the cartoony, stupid, and useless units. After that fiasco, they actually made a good game like Generals, which had units that used real tactics and you could do fun things like send in your rangers to clear out houses, or plant IED's all over the place. Oh and the Chinese hoards shooting fire and nuclear bombs everywhere, hahaha. Its too bad they would rather make games now with units that you have to micromanage just to get their abilities to even have an effect. I mean come on, Im in charge of a whole fricking army and I have to worry about one measly little unit. Fire the damn thing already!!! Its why I spent the money to research it for you!!!


User avatar
By: Anonymous

Added:Thu 11th Nov 2010 05:09, Post No: 10

I only wish when i call ae tomorrow and ask for my money back that they just give me T wars in place of this load of cat vomit. this is the worst money i ever spend..  i might just skip the refund and break the game so i can sleep better knowing that no one else will have to suffer thru this game. FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL.. YOU GUYS SUCK.. there is a reason it is brand new and went INSTANTLY to clearence.


User avatar
By: Anonymous

Added:Fri 13th Aug 2010 01:15, Post No: 9

One thing I just want to say to EA. Graphics alone do NOT make a good game. The end.


By: SegaBoy

Added:Thu 12th Aug 2010 09:52, Post No: 8

It's very simple now - play Starcraft 2, it will be exactly what you want from an RTS.


User avatar
By: Anonymous

Added:Thu 12th Aug 2010 09:07, Post No: 7

I can not believe EA ruined the Command & Conquer franchise. This game sucks. I loved Command & Conquer and after EA took over it went down the hill. After I played this game I turned it off and downloaded the original Command & Conquer Tiberian sun. I miss you Westwood. Please come back!


User avatar
By: Anonymous

Added:Sun 01st Aug 2010 18:49, Post No: 6

Big fan of Westwood, ..eh.. i mean C&C. Ive bought and played Every c&c game and red alert game , including expansions, generals and even dune for every mission more then once.

btw my favourites:  Firestorm (i liked the idea in the story),  ra2, generals (great faction choices ) and in general just any third expansion

Got c&c 4 with absolutely no prejuidice, expecting nothing from it, just wanting to have it as a fan.

HOW THE HELL COULD IT STILL DISSAPOINT SO BAD !

Where are the epic hundreds unit battles  , the wonderous micro-management which could turn the tide of battle, no base building WTF, damn i even miss the tiberium.

Every change to the game mechanics, angers and disgusts me. Can't even bring myself to do the missions, so had to see the story on Youtube, sod.

How can they throw away money and time for raj joshi and david silverman (if those are there real names) for that battlecast primetime promotion if they can't even make a decent game.

Is C&C becoming hollow, only the name and no game ?

Anyway thanks for starcraft II , which is playable at least...


User avatar
By: Anonymous

Added:Sun 04th Jul 2010 06:33, Post No: 5

I'm ahuge FAN of this series, albeit, I'm now in my early thirties, I haven't had much time to play strategy games as much as I use to,...So, I pay attention to reviews. Based on the comments I've heard.... EA is not getting a penny from me for C&C 4: First, for not only taking over Westwoods and not being able to retain the core team that made this series last. Don't you understand that it's the creative minds that produce the success you so richly desired to take over? Secondly, for mucking up the game from its core concept of "Base building"...You do yourself and the consumers of this type of game gendre a great disfavor...we will not forget this!!


User avatar
By: Anonymous

Added:Sun 11th Apr 2010 20:03, Post No: 4

cnc 3 tw and kw are better thaan this [#@!?].
ea- please redo this game or make an 5


Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • Next