The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth II
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth was very well received by series fans and real-time strategy gamers and is arguably the best RTS representation of the Lord of the Rings trilogy yet produced. When Electronic Arts announced the upcoming release of The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth II fans were energized not so much with the prospect of new campaign content by with a newer and more expanded chance to enjoy the Lord of the Rings mythology. Its release in 2006 garnered a great deal of praise and sold very well but its failure to continue the Battle for Middle Earth series hints at some unfortunate shortcomings in the design.
Battle for Middle Earth II changed a great deal of the gameplay mechanics that its predecessor introduced. Bases are no longer static locations but are now made up of individual buildings constructed by workers. Base size was also indeterminate as resource buildings need a certain amount of free space around them to generate resources efficiently. A central fortress building constructs workers, trains heroes, and functions as a command center for the player.
Unit production and composition also received an overhaul. Buildings still need to reach higher levels to produce more advanced units but instead of leveling as units are produced the player must purchase building tier upgrades. The units themselves increase in squad size with most units now holding ten units and some evil faction squads holding twenty.
There are six factions in BFME II but only two from the first title make an unaltered appearance. The forces of Good have been merged into the Men of the West, essentially the Gondor faction with Rohan cavalry. Elves and Dwarves round out the forces of good and are ranged against Isengard, Mordor, and the new Goblin faction. Each faction features its own unit and building roster and many of the heroes from the previous game have been divided up among their respective races; new heroes were also introduced to round out the new factions.
The single player elements include good and evil campaigns, a War of the Ring mode, and of course skirmish mode. The campaigns focus on each side’s perspective of the War in the North, a parallel conflict to the battles in the south during the War of the Ring that were mentioned but not covered in J.R.R. Tolkien’s books. Some battles like Mordor’s attack on Dale and Erebor come from the original work while other missions like the goblin attack on the Grey Havens were developed specifically for the game.
The War of the Ring mode is perhaps BFME II’s most intriguing feature. The entirety of Middle Earth is divided into a regional world map similar to the mission map from the first game. Players take on the role of one of the six factions in a battle for supremacy over all of Middle Earth against other factions, which can be of any race regardless of alignment. Two regional buildings can be constructed in each region and are also present in real time battles that take place in the region. For example the Fortress forces a battle whenever the territory is invaded when normally only strongholds like Helm’s Deep or Minas Tirith provoke a confrontation with invading armies.
Each faction has three armies, led by the faction’s three main heroes, that can move one region per turn and re-spawn in the player’s home territory if defeated. Other armies without a leader can be raised by regional production buildings for defense or reinforcement but cannot invade hostile territories. Resource buildings on the global map generate resources that are used to purchase buildings in other regions or train units for armies. A global population cap limits the number of units on the regional map. Armies always gain a worker unit when engaged in real time combat and can produce any unit or building during the battle regardless of the units the army actually contains.
Another innovation that generated a lot of excitement was the hero creator system. Utilizing several templates for appearance, race, faction, and class players could create heroes that would utilize certain abilities of various tiers and take on roles similar to those filled by the standard faction heroes. These created heroes could not be used in the campaign but were available in skirmish, War of the Ring, and multiplayer. During creation the players adjusted bars that related to stats like health, damage, and special abilities to determine the focus and balance of the hero. In general these created heroes were not especially comparable to faction heroes but still provided very unique flavor.
These changes made BFME II its own fully enclosed game and EA did a very fine job balancing the different races (except the Elves whose unbalanced archer upgrades had to be fixed through patches). That is both a strength and a weakness of the game as players who enjoyed the first Battle for Middle Earth because of its gameplay will find little to endear them to the sequel. At the same time many of the mechanics EA introduced would not have functioned properly in the first game’s style.
In fact that is possibly BFME II’s greatest failing. Any attempt it made to directly improve upon the original was a failure. EA advertised larger units and bigger battles and, while squads were bigger, population readjustment ensured that there actually wasn’t a difference in models or numbers of units on the field. Dynamic base building and the standardization of lower tier unit rosters (every faction has an infantry, archer, pikeman, and cavalry unit) caused the factions to lose a great deal of their unique flavor and feel. Special powers, which increased in number dramatically in BFME II, also become standardized even at higher tiers among the factions causing a lockstep of strategies regardless of which faction was played.
The campaign also failed to deliver the same feel of epic struggle that the first game provided. Most of the missions play like the great siege battles from the first Battle for Middle Earth but lack a sense of scale and also restrict gameplay due to map and objective limitations preventing players from exploring the races and mechanics they are using. Special powers also fell flat as the players are mechanically prevented from generating enough power points to unlock the full tree of powers available and if they finish the missions too quickly may not unlock higher tier powers at all.
The War of the Ring goes a long way to redressing these issues through increased re-playability and greater freedom for the player, but brings its own shortcomings as well. Movement is far too limited in relation to the player’s ability to defend home territories. Armies move too slowly and marauding enemies can conquer any region that lacks an army or defending fortress with impunity. Also aside from annoying and petty tactics the AI is for the most part incompetent, attacking the same territories repeatedly and following little rhyme or reason in its utilization of units and heroes.
By itself BFME II is a decent game with numerous options to explore and a great deal of good old fashioned RTS combat to enjoy. At higher tiers factions gain a great deal of unique abilities and high level battles can be very entertaining. The hero creation system is nothing like an RPG but is a fun way to mix up traditional skirmish battles. Yet anytime BFME II tries to assert itself into the Battle for Middle Earth series as a sequel or improvement it fails to measure up to expectations in almost every way. Another major point that does little to affect gameplay but is worth mentioning on behalf of Lord of the Rings franchise fans is that the units and heroes EA made up to fill in racial gaps feel downright alien. They are balanced and they can be fun but in no way would they ever feel natural in the original trilogy’s books or films.
Fans of Lord of the Rings will have to temper their genre love with appreciation for innovation to enjoy this game, but there is still a lot of Middle Earth to experience with the new single player modes. Most RTS fans will at least find BFME II a familiar addition to the genre and a far better title than many modern RTS games. Hard core gamers are ironically the most likely to enjoy BFME II as its gameplay panders to fast battles and micro-management. In all situations the game would be welcome in any RTS library but probably shouldn’t be purchased outside of a sale.
Warlords Battlecry III
In the early 90s, when the limits of the gaming market were still being tested, a 2D turn based strategy game, with some minor roleplaying elements, titled Warlords was released by Strategic Studios Group after it was designed by the series creator and visionary Steve Fawkner. The game itself was deceptively simple but featured great potential for extended gameplay and was easy to learn. The Warlords series would go on to spawn three sequels and in 1999 Steve Fawkner developed a spinoff series titled Warlords Battlecry.
Warlords Battlecry shook up the Warlords formula, translating the turn-based strategy and fluid army design into real-time strategy and race-based factions. Roleplaying elements were more heavily emphasized through four hero classes that any race’s hero could adopt. The game used a graphics engine reminiscent of Warcraft II and featured a similar economic style and combat system, with worker based infrastructure and mined resources and fast paced combat.
Warlords Battlecry III, developed by Infinite Interactive and published by Enlight Software in 2004, is the last title in the Battlecry series. Like its predecessors it built off the system and mechanics of the first Battlecry game, using a 2D graphics engine, expansive hero class system, and bringing back the original races and units from previous titles. Players began a battle with their hero and whatever retinue units they chose to bring along at the battle’s setup. The hero and worker units construct buildings, including a central keep or fortress that can be upgraded to unlock higher tier units and buildings.
Resources take the form of mines that must be captured by a hero unit or faction general. Battlecry III features four resources: gold, iron, stone, and crystal, and each race’s strategy emphasizes some resources more than others. Mines can be filled with up to eight worker units (four for the Dwarves and Dark Dwarves, who have more efficient workers), increasing the rate that resources are extracted. The workers remain inside the mine and are effectively removed from play; if the mine is destroyed or captured by another faction the workers are lost. Collected resources are added to their respective pools for the player and the resource cap can be expanded up to 3000 as the central keep is upgraded.
Battlecry III expanded the number of playable races to an unprecedented 16. Each race generally follows the same tech tree progression and build style with minor exceptions. For example the Wood Elf builder unit cannot be placed into mines, but several can be combined to form a crystal generating combat unit. The Undead, for another contrast, only build a few types of units and their basic infantry, the Skeleton, instantly upgrades along two paths into the various combat units of the Undead army. Each race also features certain technologies and upgrades that it may share with some other races but should not be expected in every race.
Combat takes place purely in real-time and features a surprising potential for micromanagement in an older game. Units can be set to a variety of different stances that can cause them to automatically use healing spells, follow other units around, and autonomously scout the map. The factions are balanced more through their number than through specific unit design. They are heavily thematic and most factions are better in combat against certain rivals (i.e. Knights vs Undead), than against other factions in general. Each faction has access to at least one spellcaster unit as well as a general unit that can convert buildings and inspire nearby troops in a manner similar to the hero.
The hero is the defining feature of Warlords Battlecry III’s overall gameplay. The hero acts like a regular unit in terms of movement and combat. It also features a mana pool and spellbook with which it casts the spells related to its class. Heroes can also equip items that are found on the map or taken from defeated enemy heroes; some items like weapons and armor are more effective for combat but may harm spellcasting ability while contrasting items can lower hit points and increase mana regeneration. A player’s heroes are also persistent across the game keeping their level, items, and retinue between games and game types. Any hero killed in combat is returned to life at the end of the battle and remain with the player unless made using Ironman Mode, which makes hero death permanent.
Heroes are made by the player before beginning a campaign or random map and gain experience during and after a battle. A hero can upgrade one of its four stats and one of its class skills by one point each when it gains a new level. A hero can be made from any race and class combination, although some classes are obviously better for certain races than others. In skirmish mode the race of the hero doesn’t matter in terms of selecting what faction that player will use in the battle. In the campaign, the player starts with the faction that the hero is a part of, and can play as other factions as the player accumulates allies throughout the campaign.
Warlords Battlecry III’s campaign is partially story-driven and partially open world. The player’s hero travels across different locations and complete repeat missions and story missions which affect its diplomatic standing with the other races and allow the hero to acquire new items and experience as well as advance primary and localized plot points. After each mission the hero accumulates crowns, a global resource that can be accessed on the world map to purchase mercenaries and items.
Warlords Battlecry III’s old graphics and less refined RTS style are heavily dated by modern standards but for its time it was revolutionary in its approach to strategy gaming. It was the first RTS game to feature unique hero and roleplaying elements and was radical in its unprecedented number of unique races. The game wasn’t without its flaws; primarily an ambiguous learning curve and poorly explained hero revival system. Its play speed was also quite slow even for its time. On normal speed common campaign missions can take well over an hour to complete simply because the player must wait to accumulate the resources needed to assemble an effective army.
That being said, gamers will be hard pressed to find a game with a similar formula to Battlecry III. The unique factions, persistent hero system, and combination of numerous skirmish maps alongside an extensive campaign can make for hours of new and intriguing gameplay. Battlecry III has been reported to be quite buggy on new operating systems but it is now available on Steam and gog.com. It also benefits from an extensive online community with help sites for running the game on newer operating systems and advice on which patch version (of which their are three) is best used for the player’s preferred style.
Command & Conquer 3: Kane’s Wrath
A Command & Conquer title is just not the same without an expansion pack to accompany it and flesh out its content. C&C expansions come from the golden age of expansions when gamers could expect at the least new units, missions, and multiplayer maps if not full fledged campaigns and new factions. Thankfully Electronic Arts has not departed from this model with its expansion to Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars; Command & Conquer 3: Kane’s Wrath.
Each of the three main factions receives new units and support powers. Many of these units, like the GDI Slingshot anti-air unit, were added to remove deficiencies in existing faction rosters or new gaps that arose as a result of the new minor factions. Epic units, one for each side, were also introduced as super powerful vehicles capable of crushing lesser units and could be customized by loading infantry into their hard points to add secondary weapons. The new toys are worth a few games just to play with and are enjoyable for the most part but can still be overshadowed by high tier units.
Following after its successful implementation of minor factions in Command & Conquer: Generals EA chose to add two minor factions to each major faction in Kane’s Wrath. The minor factions focus on a particular strategy or aspect of their parent faction; like flame weapons and heavy infantry for the Brotherhood of Nod or sonic weaponry and tiberium immunity for GDI. Minor factions also receive build restrictions in exchange for their specializations; one GDI minor faction can only produce basic infantry units but gets a strong boost to its armored units. Many of the new units added by Kane’s Wrath are unique to the minor factions; some are entirely new and others are improvements of existing designs to match them with their respective minor faction’s emphasis.
The campaign for Kane’s Wrath is less filled out then the rest of the game as its 13 missions only feature the Brotherhood of Nod as the playable faction. The campaign is still very well done with strong narrative and many entertaining missions. Players will also get to utilize each of Nod’s minor factions to their fullest and will also encounter the other minor factions as enemies throughout the course of the campaign. Sadly it can only serve as a blueprint for the campaign experience that could have been; the lack of a similar model for the other two factions puts a damper on the player’s ability to enjoy the new minor factions in a narrative environment.
Perhaps the most innovative addition that Kane’s Wrath brings is the Global Conquest mode. This single player options presents a turn based world map where the player, as one of the three major factions, builds bases, raises armies, and conducts global warfare against the other two factions. Bases can be upgraded with defenses and tech levels to allow them to produce armies with stronger units.
Armies can be moved a set distance across the map, or ferried between bases on different continents. When opposing armies meet or an army attacks an enemy base the battle can be auto-resolved or played out in real-time in a manner resembling a skirmish battle. However if the attacking army does not include base-building units it will not be able to construct a base and if the defending base has high enough technology and defenses it will be able to produce advanced units a the start of the game, tying in developments on the strategic level with tactical combat.
The Global Conquest mode compensates somewhat for the lack of a full campaign. Players can enjoy what each faction has to offer at length. The AI in this mode is essentially a basic Skirmish AI and is competent enough to manage the world map effectively. However its tactical capacities are lacking on lower difficulty settings and don’t always mesh in capability with the AI’s performance on the world map; making for a somewhat dichotomous experience. On the flip-side it is usually fairly easy for the player to establish a continental stronghold thus allowing the full extent of the mode’s options to be tested at length.
Multiplayer sees little improvement from C&C 3. The new minor factions can offer interesting tactical opportunities, but some limitations on their tech tree limit tactical flexibility; generally making the main factions the safer and well-rounded option. Perhaps the greatest tragedy for multiplayer was the lack of inclusion for Global Conquest mode. Granted the mode features only three factions so a multiplayer version would have been either incredibly limited or PvP only but the option still would have been a great benefit to the game; all the more so if a co-op feature had been included.
Kane’s Wrath isn’t needed to make C&C 3 a great game; the full package was already there. The minor factions are a welcome addition for expanding skirmish and multiplayer gameplay, but the lack of campaign options to enjoy them at leisure detracts a bit from their impact. However the Global Conquest mode suffers only from the somewhat mediocre performance of the AI at lower difficulty levels. In all other aspects it is a very ambitious and enjoyable experience with a smooth design that needs only the ability to share it with a friend. Kane’s Wrath isn’t its own game, but it expands C&C 3 to the fullest possible extent.
Total Annihilation
The Real-time Strategy genre was already established as a primary market for Mac and PC games when Cavedog Entertainment released its first title, Total Annihilation, in late 1997. The Command & Conquer and Warcraft series, soon to be joined by Starcraft, had set the standard for RTS gaming and many producers were attempting to make inroads into the market with their own take on the familiar genre conventions. Total Annihilation broke this mold by completely redefining what the genre was capable of.
The basic gameplay of Total Annihilation departs from the standard RTS mold almost immediately. Each game, whether in single or multiplayer, with a few campaign exceptions, starts with the Commander Unit, a powerful mech that produces a modest amount of resources and can construct the basic buildings needed to start a base. The Commander is also very tough and possesses the D-gun, a disintegration weapon that can destroy anything in one shot. Structures are built over time by the Commander or other construction vehicles, with higher tier vehicles required to produce higher tier structures.
The game’s two resources are metal and energy. Metal appears as tinfoil-like deposits on the map (or anywhere on Core’s metal homeworld) while energy is simply generated by buildings like solar collectors and fusion reactors. Both resources are harvested at a fixed rate by buildings and provide both a stockpile and income rate. Players can produce units and buildings within the income limits, or can deficit spend by overclocking their resource requirements and dipping into the stockpiles. Resource harvesting is fairly easy to manipulate; certain buildings can convert energy into metal and some worlds have high wind speeds or tidal force for alternative energy generation. However proper management is extremely critical in the early game where resource shortages can slow production to a crawl. Most units also require energy to fire their weapons and high energy output is needed for higher tier weapons to function.
Total Annihilation is set in the distant future where the technology to transfer the human mind into a machine body has caused a galactic civil war between the robotic Core and the biological Arm. Both sides employ analogous units with similar functions but different aesthetic designs. Arm units have a more terrestrial design while Core units tend to be skeletal and lack cockpits or other indications that they might have a pilot. Arm units are for the most part faster, possess rapid fire weapons, and have lighter armor. Conversely Core units are heavier, slower, and feature high powered, slow firing weapons.
Each faction has its own campaign with twenty five missions, for a total of fifty in the base game. Each campaign starts on the faction’s homeworld and takes the player through the final stages of the galactic war before climaxing in an assault on the enemy’s homeworld. Most missions begin with the Commander and a small starting force from which the player must construct the army necessary to destroy the enemy’s fortified bases. Occasionally a special objective will be featured, but for the most part the only requirement is the annihilation of the opposing force.
Total Annihilation’s story is told purely through a brief opening cinematic and text based mission briefings, each with an audio narration providing some additional flavor. Little in the way of character is presented and there are no characters mentioned by name except for the Core ruling entity, a super computer called Central Consciousness. The missions follow a linear progression of the player’s conquests, with roughly three to four missions taking place on a single world before the player moves on to a new world. The lack of flavor keeps the immersion level somewhat low and sometimes fails to give the player an adequate sense of his or her accomplishments. However the campaign is very detailed in its mission designs and tech progression allowing the player to fully enjoy the different strategic options each faction presents.
The AI opponents in Total Annihilation leave something to be desired. Even for the time the AI was considered simple and this is a side effect of the game’s innovation. The combined arms tactics and strategic planning required for a truly challenging situation are difficult even for modern AI to accomplish properly. For the most part Total Annihilation does the best it can and the AI is capable enough to utilize its tech tree and create thorough defenses inside its bases. These deficiencies somewhat hamper the enjoyment of the game’s skirmish mode and to a degree the player must explore strategies on their own initiative rather than be forced to adapt by the AI’s maneuvers.
The skirmish and multiplayer modes would be familiar for the time period. Elements like fog of war, population cap, and victory conditions can be switched between a limited number of options. Sadly a cheat code is required to unlock more than four player slots. This can allow up to ten players, but cannot be used in multiplayer. Multiplayer is no longer officially supported but fan sponsored servers now host multiplayer games, although matchmaking is not supported.
Total Annihilation was one of the first games to introduce 3D graphics. Units make a full revolution instead of shifting to a different model stance when turning. Structures with moving parts operate seamlessly, bringing a surprising degree of life to the world. The most notable effect this innovation has is on the interaction between units and terrain. Artillery shells smash into hillsides while the cannon adjusts its aim; units can hide under trees and must adjust their shots when shooting up hillsides of varying height. The units themselves follow a polygon style of graphic rendering typical of the period of early 3D development and can at times look goofy or abstract. The technology is certainly dated by today’s standards but is still sufficient and supplies some of the best explosions and flying shrapnel that a RTS game has ever produced. It was also very gentle on processors of its day and modern machines should have no trouble running even large matches.
Total Annihilation may not have possessed some of the qualities that today are considered necessary for longevity such as a deep thematic campaign, dynamic AI, and a variety of factions. However its combined arms emphasis, strategic breakdown of tiers, and 3D terrain modelling and interaction were revolutionary for their time and even today have not been seen on such a detailed and well built scale except in Total Annihilation’s spiritual successor, Supreme Commander. These are the elements that not only make Total Annihilation a centerpiece of RTS history but also an enjoyable, engaging, and fulfilling exercise in true strategic, combined arms combat. Everything that the RTS genre was meant to be and can possibly deliver can be found in Total Annihilation.
Author’s note: Total Annihilation is available digitally on gog.com and Steam and is compatible with current operating systems. The digital product features the base game, official expansions, and DLC released during Cavedog Entertainment’s existence.
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War – Dark Crusade & Soulstorm
The last two expansions to Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War, Dawn of War – Dark Crusade and Dawn of War – Soulstorm, are best looked at as a separate bundle from the main game as both bring new life and dramatic changes. Both games are standalone expansions developed by Iron Lore Entertainment and supported by the original Dawn of War developer Relic Entertainment. Each expansion adds two new races (Necrons and Tau in Dark Crusade and the Dark Eldar and Sisters of Battle in Soulstorm) and feature new non-linear campaigns loosely connected to the narratives of the previous game and expansion.
Each race’s tech tree is reworked to more heavily emphasize thematic strategies and limit the number of top tier units. The new races , except in part for the Sisters of Battle, also feature new mechanics for base building, population, and special resources opening up a number of new tactical options and styles for players to explore. The Necrons, for example, train all their units from a single structure and only use one of the two resource types; the other resource type is subverted into expanding the Necron’s population cap. Existing races received minor changes and a new unit with each expansion. The air units, added in Soulstorm, provide a new but limited level of tactical flexibility, particularly to those races who’s air units utilize high explosives.
Alongside new races, both expansions feature a complete overhaul in campaign style and content. Instead of the story driven, race-limiting missions of the previous Dawn of War titles, Dark Crusade and Soulstorm utilize non-linear, world map campaigns. Each race is fully playable with its own narrative and small set of in-game cutscenes. Dark Crusade’s campaign takes place on the fictional world of Kronus and much of the planet’s landmass is used as the world map and divided into regions of varying size. Soulstorm expands this concept by broadening the campaign map into the four planets, each divided into a few large territories, and three moons of the fictional Kaurava system. Players choose a race and lead that race to conquer the campaign map by taking their faction’s hero-led army and moving it into hostile regions.
There is no overarching plot and story elements are based off of each individual race’s motivations and long term goals. Most of the battles take place in skirmish style against AI forces with varying levels of strength and skill based on the campaign’s difficulty level and the strength of individual regions. Each conquered regions unlocks an honor guard unit that accompanies the player’s army throughout the campaign and is available at the start of each mission (as opposed to regularly trained units which do not carry over between missions). Some regions instead offer special bonuses to the player’s faction or army on the campaign map. Hostile races are eventually eliminated when the player attacks their headquarters region in highly entertaining scripted missions with intense battles and multi-tier objectives. Once all headquarters have been captured the campaign ends with a final in-game cutscene and narrative that describes the long term effects of the player’s conquest on the galaxy.
The single player campaigns place these expansions head and shoulders above their predecessors. Individual skirmish style missions can get repetitive as races are eliminated and the AI looses strategic assets, but the overall conquest aspect combined with the scripted finale missions make these campaigns a singularly enjoyable experience that few if any RTS titles have been able to match. Players can utilize the full range of combat options for each race across a wide variety of maps and even on lower difficulty settings the scripted missions are still quite challenging, very satisfying, and even comically entertaining as the races’ leaders banter with each other over the course of the battle. The option to replay these campaigns with every race extends the lifespan of the single player element immensely.
The AI’s performance in skirmish and multiplayer modes remains effectively the same as in previous Dawn of War titles. It falters somewhat in Soulstorm as it struggles to effectively use the latest units; but remains competent enough to provide a challenge for any level of gamer. The AI was also somewhat cured of its tendency for predictable build patterns and, depending on difficulty level, now makes effective use of higher tier units.
Multiplayer remains strong with Dark Crusade and Soulstorm as it was in previous titles. The new races are very well balanced (although a patch is required for Soulstorm to fully iron out some exploits in the game mechanics), and a host of new multiplayer maps are available supporting anywhere from 2 to 8 players in a number of layouts for team play and free for all. Multiplayer connections remain stable when faced with lag. A sixty second timeout is granted to lagging connections and de-synchronization is virtually unheard of. However battles in Dark Crusade and Soulstorm are quite large, and can actually be even larger than Dawn of War and Winter Assault due to the change-up of unit build limits, and low tier connections will struggle to keep up during pitched battles.
Dark Crusade is a must for any gamer that enjoyed Dawn of War and Winter Assault. Its new and innovative campaign provides a full and satisfying experience and the new races offer some play styles not yet seen in the Dawn of War series. Soulstorm’s contributions are less dramatic in the face of Dark Crusade’s rapid advances; this is in part due to the dissolution of Soulstorm’s primary developer, Iron Lore, prior to its release. Soulstorm’s campaign changes its scale but not necessarily its size and the scripted missions are toned down and lacking in immersive flavor. The new races do offer more diversity for gaming options, particularly in multiplayer formats, but struggle to find their place among the older races. However Soulstorm is still a fine expansion and its content only adds to the overall Dawn of War experience.
Dawn of War was already a fine title and these expansions make it truly great. Their story, gameplay, and re-playability are top of the line and can be enjoyed in many ways by gamers of every level. Fans of the Warhammer 40,000 universe who were not fully satisfied with the original Dawn of War and Winter Assault should certainly give Dawn of War another chance with these new expansions as more races, expanded flavor, and a deeper portrayal of the universe’s fiction bring the grim future of the 41st millennium to life.
Starcraft & Brood War
With the release of Blizzard Entertainment’s Starcraft II: Legacy of the Void in late 2015 the sci-fi saga that started with Starcraft II’s predecessor Starcraft and its expansion Brood War has finally come to a grand conclusion. Starcraft II as a whole is a true sequel. Much of the gameplay remains unaltered and the single player campaigns are heavily story driven and populated primarily with characters from the first Starcraft game. It’s story is rich and its gameplay heavily steeped in conventions developed by a decade of Starcraft competitive gaming. Most of the enjoyment the average gamer receives from Starcraft II stems from these core elements and, while they are adequately self-contained within Starcraft II, the richness of the story and gameplay can only be fully experienced by gamers who have played through Starcraft and Brood War.
Starcraft, released by Blizzard Entertainment in 1998 and followed later that year by its official expansion Brood War and a mission and map pack titled Insurrection, was the start of the second major franchise that Blizzard Entertainment would develop. It followed on the heels of Blizzard’s highly successful Warcraft II: Tides of Darkness (to which it was excessively and somewhat unfairly compared) and made several revolutionary additions to Blizzard’s style of gaming and to the Real-time Strategy genre as a whole. It was slow to catch on during the first few years following its release but eventually grew to become one of the most popular and influential RTS games in history.
Starcraft builds heavily on the Blizzard style of RTS mechanics for its groundwork. A central building produces worker units which harvest resources from nearby static resource nodes. The workers construct buildings and each tier of structures unlocks more structures granting the player access to more powerful units and abilities. Time and economic management are critical components to success and a heavy emphasis is placed on micromanagement of individual unit abilities and unit formations; particularly as they relate to combined arms tactics.
Beyond these basic mechanics is where Starcraft’s innovation begins to stand out. Starcraft was the first RTS to present factions that were completely different in form and function. Previous RTS titles had introduced elements that made faction styles different, but these factions still shared some units and combat options. Each faction in Starcraft has a unique unit and building roster and its own style of economic and military strategy. For example Terran workers must individually see a building through to completion while Protoss buildings are constructed autonomously and Zerg workers must be sacrificed to build a Zerg structure.
Combat between the races fluctuated heavily based on the strategies players and the AI employed for each race. Zerg units tend to be cheap and suited for mass attacks, but the Zerg just as often have to leverage their unconventional air units and special abilities to counter Terran area-of-effect attacks and Protoss special abilities. On the other hand Protoss units are by far the strongest in the game but require substantial unit diversity in most of their strategies. This exceptional degree of unit and strategy variance has kept Starcraft’s overall gameplay surprisingly balanced and perfectly suited for competitive play.
Starcraft’s storyline does not stray far from typical sci-fi stories of conflict. The game is set at the transition into the 26th century and takes place in a remote part of the Milky Way Galaxy called the Koprulu Sector. The Terran faction is composed of human exiles from Earth and makes first contact with the alien Protoss and Zerg races at the start of the game. Each race has its own campaign which comprises ten missions divided into episodes for continuity. The player takes on the role of each race’s equivalent of a generic commander and follows several characters through the missions as Starcraft’s story unfolds. The campaign’s menu screen even recommends that players complete the episodes in order. Knowledge of the story is not necessary for the player to adequately complete missions or understand the races’ mechanics, but half of Starcraft’s quality content can be summed up in its highly developed fiction.
Starcraft is nothing if not thematic and flavorful. The game’s overarching story drives the missions and develops the characters. Mission briefings feature unit portrait animations of the characters while an audio of their voice actors narrates their interactions with each other. By modern standards it’s a primitive system but the voice acting talent is well chosen and the narrative keeps the player immersed in the fictional universe.
The other half of Starcraft’s quality and the primary source of its popularity is multiplayer. Skirmish modes against the AI as well as LAN and internet multiplayer are available. Internet hosting is provided by Blizzard’s hosting service Battle.net and is a very reliable and consistent support platform. Starcraft’s AI is fairly one-dimensional and generally favors wave-expand-wave patterns that can intimidate younger players and bore experienced players. With that being said the AI is at least competent enough to use each race’s abilities properly and fully explore its tech tree and is sufficient for casual gamers to enjoy co-op LAN games.
Starcraft’s multiplayer demands little of an average internet connection. If connectivity problems arise the game provides players with a short lag timer when a connection is slow or fails, then the players may vote to kick the lagging player if the connection has not been restored. Indeed Starcraft is legendary in the multiplayer community with national tournaments held among pro-gamers annually. As mentioned before the races are well balanced and offer multiple strategies that gamers of all levels can adopt and improve upon.
Starcraft also features a comprehensive map editor with numerous customization features. Everything that the developers used to make the campaign missions (except the voice actors and their corresponding audio files) are available to a prospective designer and in its heyday thousands of custom maps were available to online players to enjoy. Starcraft’s graphics utilize 3D modelling for units and objects but the game still operates a 2D interface. The Starcraft is nevertheless very colorful with a surprising degree of unit detail which was gentle with processors of the time and no problem to even low-tier modern computers.
By this point Starcraft’s graphics, cinematics, and trigger mechanics are thoroughly outdated. However it remains a hallmark among the more advanced games of its generation and continues to provide fast paced action for competitive gamers and rich story and editing ability for casual and inventive players. Blizzard support for Starcraft remains consistent and the main game and Brood War can still be acquired online through Battle.net. Now that Starcraft II’s trilogy has been released Starcraft forms the linchpin of one of the most inventive and successful franchises’ in RTS gaming history.
Command & Conquer
Discussing Real-time Strategy games without going back to the genre’s roots just feels too much like starting a fiction novel without reading the prologue. So we’re going to take a look back at one of the games that helped start it all: Command & Conquer. Sometimes referred to informally as Tiberian Dawn to bring it in line with its sequals, Command & Conquer was developed by Westwood Studios and released by Virgin Interactive in 1995. While Dune II: The Building of a Dynasty (also by Westwood) was the company’s first RTS title and also the first true RTS in the genre, Command & Conquer was the title that would go on to help define the genre and set the standard for Westwood’s style of RTS products.
Command & Conquer refined the building and management process of Dune II into the Westwood style of RTS. A single Construction Yard assembled all the player’s buildings for a set cost in the game’s resource, in this case Tiberium. Tiberium was harvested by a heavily armored Harvester unit and deposited at the Tiberium Refinery. Most structures in the base had to be supplied by power plants. Infantry and vehicles were produced from the barracks and war factory respectively (Nod’s buildings had different names and styles but were mechanically the same). Higher level buildings unlocked more advanced units culminating in each faction’s superweapon.
The game’s two factions, GDI and the Brotherhood of Nod, obeyed similar structural rules in their tech trees but were thematically very different. GDI was the slow, expensive faction with a strong emphasis on conventional firepower and most of the its units outclassed their counterparts in Nod’s arsenal. This included the thematic Mammoth Tank, which was the strongest unit in the game and one of only three units capable of targeting both air and ground units. Nod on the other hand emphasized speed, adaptability, and long range. It possessed nearly twice as many siege units as GDI and was the only faction with cost-effective hard counters against infantry. Nod also possessed far more powerful defensive structures.
Command & Conquer’s story is set in the near future (early 2000s) from the game’s publishing perspective and depicts an international conflict between the U.N. backed Global Defense Initiative (abbreviated GDI) and the cult style terrorist group Brotherhood of Nod (often simply called Nod or The Brotherhood). The game features two campaigns where players take on the role of a promising commander in either GDI or the Brotherhood. GDI’s campaign takes place in Europe and is characterized by missions with strong defensive emphasis and occasionally limited tactical options. The Brotherhood of Nod’s campaign is set in Africa and features a much higher degree of “commando” missions where the player either does not have a base or must acquire one through subterfuge.
A central element to Command & Conquer’s story and gameplay is Tiberium, an alien substance that gathers minerals from the soil into a highly concentrated, easily harvested form allowing GDI and Nod to quickly amass raw materials for their war machines. However Tiberium is also highly toxic and its rapid absorption quickly depletes the soil causing severe environmental damage. The control of Tiberium and protection of civilian communities affected by its spread is a major sub-theme in several GDI missions, sometimes to the point of overshadowing the wider conflict with Nod. The Brotherhood of Nod on the other hand venerates Tiberium as the door to the future and actively seeks to spread it and manipulate its various properties.
Westwood’s style of RTS, which the mechanics of GDI and Nod very heavily demonstrated, were in contrast to other rising RTS games of the time in that they emphasized tactical and strategic flexibility over army composition. The factions were markedly different and in some ways unbalanced. GDI was most vulnerable in the early game where Nod’s speed and adaptability could overwhelm GDI’s limited options. In the late game the balanced switched to favor GDI’s super heavy Mammoth Tank, all purpose long range weapons, and monopoly on aircraft (save for a single Nod helicopter unit in multiplayer). Neither side was completely outclassed in any phase of the game, but changing parameters over the course of the game forced players to adopt new tactics to defeat their opponents.
The story of Command & Conquer is extensively developed with live action cutscenes between missions interspersed with CGI videos detailing the backstory of Tiberium and the two factions. Simple CGI clips also preceded and concluded each mission though they were purely for thematic effect. The story also helps set the stage for many of the missions for each side as minor plot points come and go, such as a power struggle in the Brotherhood of Nod and GDI’s political battle with the U.N. to secure funding for its operations. The live action scenes are simple and sometimes misleading in relation to following missions, but are a rare and refreshing element sadly missing in modern RTS games and are perhaps one of the most immersive parts of the game’s whole experience.
Multiplayer is the only form of skirmish that Command & Conquer possesses, although matches can be played against humans or the AI. The entire faction arsenal is unlocked (with Nod gaining two units not seen in single player) and players compete against each other or the AI on a battle map selected from the game’s map library. The AI was fairly reliable for its time and could provide a decent challenge, although it lacked the ability to effectively utilize Nod’s speed and unpredictability to its fullest. Mutliplayer games for the most part ran smoothly and were forgiving with slower internet speeds as it was largely compatible with the dial-up service of the time.
Command & Conquer is obviously heavily dated by modern standards with its non-linear factions, simplistic AI, and obviously simple graphics. It is available as freeware and with collection packs from Electronic Arts on Origin, although its compatibility with newer operating systems and hardware is variable. Nevertheless its impact on the RTS genre cannot be overstated. Command & Conquer would go on to become one of the most iconic and successful series of the RTS genre with three sequel titles and three spin-off titles (not including their respective expansions) continuing and refining its legacy. The game’s nostalgia may wane a bit for older players after exposure to modern gaming and new gamers will likely see no reason to invest much time in it. However Command & Conquer is a simple and at this point a rather unique experience that any casual gamer could enjoy and at the very least deserves to be remembered as one of the founding pillars of RTS gaming of its time and for the foreseeable future.
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War Gold Edition
Games Workshop’s Warhammer 40,000 franchise (often abbreviated Warhammer 40k), like its predecessor and source of inspiration Warhammer Fantasy is rich in the lore and military diversity that Real-time Strategy games thrive on. It should come as no surpirse that Relic Entertainment’s RTS adaption of this universe, Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War, is not only a superb rendition of this dark science fiction future but also a splendid RTS game overall. Dawn of War, and the first of its expansions Winter Assault (bundled together in the Gold Edition) brings the dystopian universe of Warhammer 40k to life with intense and bloody combat, superb visuals, and deeply immersive factions.
Dawn of War follows the basic RTS conventions of gameplay. Players start with a single command center (or equivalent) which produces workers and a basic military unit. These military units are used to capture strategic points, static markers around the map that passively generate one of the game’s two basic resources. Resource generation can be improved by constructing Listening Posts on these points once they are captured. Workers construct the various buildings that train and upgrade units and heroes as well as the generators that produce the second resource: plasma. Tier upgrades at the command center unlock more advanced buildings which in turn allow the construction of stronger units and vehicles.
Aside from workers, heroes, and vehicles, all units come out as squads with most squads starting at four units. Squads can be reinforced for an additional cost in resources up to a maximum that varies depending on the unit and the race (the hefty Space Marines have an average squad size of 8 while the numerous Orks can field squads as large as 14). Squads may additionally be upgraded with special weapons that can enhance the squad’s overall performance or make it more effective against one unit type versus another; as well as leader units that improve morale and combat effectiveness. Morale itself is a key factor in combat; units under fire take a steady morale loss. When morale drops to critical levels the squad ‘breaks’, an effect marked by red icons around the squad units, and loses most of its combat effectiveness. Most vehicles and some special units do not have the morale feature.
The Gold Edition features five playable factions: the Space Marines, Eldar, Forces of Chaos, and Orks of the base Dawn of War and the Imperial Guard from Winter Assault. These factions follow similar build styles and combat capability, although specifics like raising the population cap and which units can detect invisible squads do vary. The true differences lie in the offensive and defensive tactics represented in their units. Chaos and the Orks tend to be heavily melee focused with overwhelming numbers while the Elder and Space Marines are expensive, skilled combatants, with a strong emphasis on ranged combat. The Imperial Guard and Space Marines additionally are notable for being “Jacks of all trades” where their basic units are highly adaptable; the Orks, Chaos, and the Eldar often have to field many different unit types for a balanced force.
The single player campaign in Dawn of War follows one of these factions, the Space Marines, through a series of linear missions where the player faces the Orks, Eldar, and Chaos in an expanding plot about Chaos influence on the planet Tartarus. The missions are very well detailed and quite challenging allowing the player to experience the full extent of the Space Marine arsenal and the dynamics of their combat tactics against the other races. Yet while the story and experience are immersive and enjoyable the Space Marines are the only faction with a campaign, the other factions can only be used in skirmish and multiplayer.
This downside is solved somewhat in Winter Assault where every race, except the Space Marines in a very ironic design twist, gets a piece of another story based campaign of five missions divided between the order (Eldar and Imperial Guard) and disorder (Chaos and the Orks) teams where each factions attempts to gain control of an Imperial Titan super mech. Both campaigns begin with missions introducing the factions followed by a shared level where the player chooses which of the factions in their team they want to continue with (represented by a ‘falling out’ of the factions in game). The final mission takes place at the Titan regardless of which faction the player chooses; although the methods of victory differ.
The Winter Assault campaign is very flavorful and its highly interconnected missions give the player a strong sense of interactive narrative. Unfortunately the campaign’s very short duration and partial restriction on what factions are playable severely limits the opportunity the player has to engage and enjoy each faction. The highly enjoyable final mission, modified for each race, alleviates this shortchange to some degree but overall players will find Winter Assault’s replay-ability to be heavily dependent on their willingness to test the skirmish AI’s varying difficulty levels.
Upon its release in 2004 Dawn of War’s graphics and presentation were top of the line. Individual units are highly detailed and many feature very entertaining (and sometimes quite bloody) killing animations (in which the units are mercifully invulnerable to damage). Graphic detail also brings the faction flavor to life with numerous details like facial icons shifting and warping on Chaos buildings and goblin-like Gretchin crawling around the debris of Ork structures. All this detail does tax the video card to some degree and mid-line machines from the period (usually XP operating systems) may struggle with long skirmish and multiplayer games. Modern machines should have no trouble with large scale skirmish games. Dawn of War’s multiplayer is equally well done, with simple setup and connection interfaces that suffer few if any malfunctions on any connection capable of handling RTS play.
Dawn of War, Gold Edition features five levels of Skirmish AI difficulty which provide a decent challenge for players of all experience levels and, except for the hardest AI setting, do not appear to cheat. Multiplayer is even more entertaining with teamplay against the AI and player vs player matches providing ample opportunities to experiment with different faction strategies. Loading time for most multiplayer matches is more dependent on individual PC performance than shared internet connectivity and overall is quite fast allowing for multiple matches to be played over the course of a single session. The factions themselves naturally have some early game build patterns that can sideline the first five minutes into routine, but the unit trees are diverse enough to facilitate widely fluctuating combat scenarios throughout a session.
The Dawn of War Gold Edition is a very well designed strategy game with a rich plot, thematic and well balanced factions, and easily managed skirmish and multiplayer capabilities. While the single player is very linear and lacking in scope its missions and plot line are rich in flavor and abound with opportunities for intense combat. Resource and base management have been sidelined in favor of more detailed unit and army management leading to expansive and satisfying battles against the AI and other players. The graphics and UI options may seem somewhat dated by modern standards; but with the RTS market so sparsely populated gamers will be hard pressed to find a more satisfying RTS experience than Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War.
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth
Its inevitable that successful book, and to a greater degree film, franchise will spawn numerous titles in different media. The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth is not Electronic Arts’ first foray into J.R.R. Tokien’s Middle Earth but is certainly EA’s best. Following on the heels of Liquid Entertainment’s and Sierra Entertainment’s The Lord of the Rings: War of the Ring, The Battle for Middle Earth is the second real time strategy game to be set on Middle Earth during the War of the Ring and events of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Unlike many previous game titles The Battle for Middle Earth is based exclusively off the interpretation of Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings film trilogy.
The Battle for Middle Earth takes a new approach to RTS play. Bases are now constructed from pre-located build slots in circular base layouts of varying sizes, each categorized by the number of building slots it provides (i.e. a stronghold provides six build slots while a citadel provides eight). Units are unlocked as their production centers level up through increased use. Most troop units come in groups, with five being standard for cavalry and human units while ten is more common for orcs. Upgrades are applied to each individual unit for a price and remain fixed, even if the unit suffers losses. Special powers, familiar to players of EA’s Command & Conquer Generals, make a comeback as special or passive abilities acquired by purchasing them from a tree that unlocks more options as the player purchases more powers. Power points are acquired through destroying enemy units and structures.
The power trees are divided between good and evil teams. In the campaign these are shared by the two factions that make up each team, but the trees are split in multiplayer with the factions sharing some powers but keeping others for themselves. The four playable factions are the great participants in the War of the Ring: Gondor, Isengard, Mordor, and Rohan. Good and Evil aligned factions share similar traits, for example only Good aligned factions can build walls and only Evil aligned factions have powers that boost their economic ability. In keeping with the thematic presentations of the films each faction features its own artistic style and for the most part possess unique unit and building trees. The designs are very flavorful and surprisingly well balanced. Some factions lack the diverse build options of others (Isengard is pretty one-dimensional and Rohan can only choose from six units) but their unique designs leave few holes for enemy teams to exploit.
The heroes of Middle Earth make an appearance as well. Seven of the Fellowship can be trained between Gondor and Rohan (only Sam and Frodo are restricted to the campaign), and these are supplemented by the royals of Rohan and Boromir’s brother Faramir. Heroes are a lacking aspect for the Evil team, with Isengard offering two and Mordor deploying three aerial Nazgul. These are powerful heroes, but far less flashy and unique than their good counterparts. This is not a design error so much as a thematic choice; the Evil factions are able to field a far greater amount of troops and unit types than the Good factions, making the heroes more of a counterweight than an exploitation.
The story for the Battle for Middle Earth’s campaign is the story of the Lord of the Rings, primarily as told by Peter Jackson’s film trilogy. Players can come to this game and reasonably expect its story to be entertaining. Even knowing the ending is no spoiler since the outcome hinges on the player’s success in scripted mission such as the Siege of Minas Tirith or Sam’s liberation of Frodo at Cirith Ungol. While the game’s cinematic openings may promise a grander scale than the mission’s scripting and capacity can actually deliver players trekking through the Good campaign can expect massive battles and sieges where their hero units can shine against overwhelming numbers of orcs, Uruk-hai, and trolls. The Evil campaign is even more exciting to experience as the player challenges the established outcomes of the trilogy. EA admittedly had to take some creative licensing with missions like Mordor’s subjugation of Harad or Isengard’s assault on Edoras, but since the Evil campaign boils down to the forces of darkness winning the War of the Ring scenarios like these are logical conclusions.
All of the fantastic elements of Middle Earth make an appearance including Ents, giant eagles, the Army of the Dead, and even the Balrog. Battles between scripted missions generally play like skirmish battles which can lead to some repetitive experiences depending on how long the player wants to continue the campaign (the player can finish the campaign before all of Middle Earth is conquered). However each mission has a minor bonus objective unique to that region; they don’t need to be completed to win the region but completing the objective eases the player’s fight against their opponent. Once the player finishes a capstone scripted mission (Minas Tirith for Good and Osgiliath for Evil) towards the later half of the campaign all of southern Middle Earth is available for conquest by any of the armies the player previously used in earlier missions.
For its time Battle for Middle Earth was a graphically advanced game. There are few flashy explosions but the minutiae of the game is very well detailed. This does the story of the War of the Ring the service its due, but can lead to massive performance issues on a machine which runs closer to the minimum system requirements. Little of the gameplay experience is lost on lower graphics settings, but having to play in fear of a game ending crash is a worry that can always be done away with. As with most EA RTS games the multiplayer connection can be finicky during launch; dropping players for no apparent reason. Thankfully this is not a crippling side effect; it has no long lasting effects and is a fairly rare occurrence.
Playing through the campaigns for the Good and Evil teams pretty much encompasses the full single player experience. Eighteen scripted missions and over thirty regions to conquer make for hours upon hours of gameplay. Each faction’s full tech tree is available as the campaign progresses, with the power point special powers taking the longest to unlock. Available skirmish maps include all of the non-scripted missions (sadly, the Siege of Minas Tirith can only be replayed through saves and new campaigns). Supporting two to eight players with several different types player setups (some regions only have outposts for starting locations where others offer citadels).
The game’s AI is competent but not spectacular. It follows logical paths for the deployment of infantry, cavalry, siege units and such. However its use of powers is quite predictable and on anything below the hardest difficulty the AI’s penchant for expansion is little to none. As a flip side however this one of the few EA RTS games were the learning curve is more stable. Casual players may find even the normal AI to pose little challenge but the more relaxed pace allows players to level their heroes and unlock powers before the end game.
The Lord of the Rings: The Battle for Middle Earth is by far the most flavorful and thematic Lord of the Rings RTS to date with immaculate attention to detail and a very immersive and entertaining single player campaign. Fans of the trilogy, especially the movies, will enjoy the movie references and familiar scenes. RTS gamers may find the unique game elements confusing and perhaps boring, but like any good RTS game the heart of the experience is combat and here Battle for Middle Earth does not disappoint. For whatever reason the Battle for Middle Earth is not available for online download through any store; but even at full price this game is worth the purchase for any player, casual or skilled, who wants to run the battles of the War of the Ring.
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
After the dissolution of Westwood Studios in 2003 the Real Time Strategy market experienced a general stagnation in productivity. Several companies continued to produce stand alone RTS titles and some spinoffs but suffered from a lack of stylistic direction as they attempted to formulate new templates of RTS gameplay separate from the Blizzard and Westwood formats. In this period gamers were introduced to a lot of different RTS mechanics and interfaces; yet none of them were able to compare with the genre setting giants of old until Electronic Arts introduced a new title in the Command & Conquer series: Command and Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars.
Command & Conquer 3 revived the long absent Command & Conquer series; bringing with it the familiar standards of the Westwood RTS format such as a central Construction Yard, refinery resource processing, and flashy explosive late game battles. Most skirmish battles, multi-player battles, and single player missions start the player off with little more than a construction yard from which the player must construct a base and army in order to crush their opponents. Base and army building follow the standard Westwood format with higher tier buildings unlocking more advanced units and abilities. Power plants are required in increasing numbers to maintain a growing base and base defenses are divided by their effectiveness against different unit types.
The series’ principle factions, GDI and Nod, return to continue their struggle over the eponymous resource tiberium and their differing views on its terramorphic properties. The game’s storyline picks up not long after the series’ previous title Command & Conquer Tiberian Sun and its expansion Firestorm. Reminiscent of previous C&C games players begin the campaign with a limited tech tree; benefiting from more units and abilities as the campaign progresses. Missions include the old RTS fares like escort missions, base defense, and territory control. Yet unlike older RTS titles Command & Conquer 3 spices up these familiar missions with more appropriate strategies and units; often taking the unique tactical situation of each mission as a chance to introduce the player to a new unit type. Stealth missions will utilize Snipers teams and Juggernaut artillery or Commandos and Stealth Tanks. A feature not unheard of but seriously underused in previous RTS games.
Support powers, available on the left hand side of the screen as the buildings required for them are built, make an appearance in the mainline C&C series for the first time. These powers require a certain amount of cash to be used and must recharge between uses; they also require a line of sight on their target. Some powers are more useful in a multiplayer setting against human players and, sadly, many rapidly become obsolete as the tech tree is unlocked. However many can be used to game changing effect and overall the support powers should be actively utilized; particularly in the single player campaign.
The single player campaign is undoubtedly C&C 3’s strongest feature. Following the vein established by earlier Westwood games the campaign for both factions follows a series of story-driven missions where the player completes a series of objectives, often gradually unlocked as the player progresses through the mission. New units and structures are made available each mission until the faction’s full arsenal is unlocked. The enemies each faction faces vary as the missions go by and some missions will involve the player facing off against two enemies. Unlike older titles which feature supposed ‘bitter enemies’ ignoring their differences to attack the player; in C&C 3 three way battles remain a constantly fluctuating contest between all three factions (some brief ceasefires do appear).
The Scrin, a new playable race that EA has introduced to the Tiberium series of C&C games, is an alien race based off of hints and plot elements from earlier titles in the Tiberium series. The Scrin are very dependent on tiberium and many of their strategies revolve around it; they also feature more heavily specialized units and a greater reliance on aircraft than other factions. Although their short, unlockable campaign provides only a brief glimpse at their faction history and story it still provides challenging missions and entertaining cinematics (all CGI however).
Live action cut scenes and cinematics reappear with renewed visual splendor. Each mission is interspersed with a live action briefing prefacing the situation the player will face in the upcoming mission and its relevance to the faction’s overall goal. The acting and dialogue could certainly be called campy but is far more enjoyable as the characters struggle with the increasingly complex situations the game’s plot thrusts them into. For what could be the first time in RTS history the characters actually sympathize with the player when real time situations turn grim. Settings come alive with numerous extras and improved background visuals. The only thing sadly missing are the old Westwood endgame videos; sadly few if any in-game units are seen in CGI animation. In a masterful move by EA the story of C&C 3 is concise enough that players need not have played the older C&C games to follow the story (although their enjoyment of the cutscenes is enhanced by familiarity with the series).
Following on the heels of EA’s last C&C title, Command & Conquer: Generals, C&C 3 features a very vivid display with heat waves, sonic pulses, and dust clouds all beautifully rendered alongside vibrant explosions and flying wreckage. While beautiful this does exact a heavy toll on graphics utilities and PCs with up to date graphics cards and drivers are recommended for anything beyond the barest visual experience when running C&C 3.
Skirmish mode varies little from previous C&C titles. Map options ranging from 2 to 8 players are available and players can set the amount of starting cash they begin with as well as special options like bonus crates and allowing superweapons. Although playing with a faction’s full tech tree is inevitably entertaining the game’s AI can be predictable and varies widely in its skill between difficulty levels making for a poor learning curve. EA mitigates this somewhat by allowing players to select archetypes for the AI personality such as Rusher or Turtler. Games also tend to be fast paced with the winner or loser often decided within the first ten minutes. While this is preferable for many gamers it does deprive anyone wishing to explore and enjoy a faction’s tech tree of more than a few opportunities to test strategies and units.
Multiplayer in C&C 3 is smooth and consistent. Sadly it suffers from the same flaws as the skirmish mode, namely predictable AI and a poor learning curve. However the large number of map options and quick gameplay fare far better in a multiplayer setting and combine with easy multiplayer setup to allow a large number of diverse games to be played in short order.
Newer gamers, particularly those familiar with RTS games but not with older C&C titles, might find C&C 3’s rehash of Westwood’s style dated and perhaps even simplistic. Fans of the C&C series will love this game and although EA’s touch has made subtle changes to the old Westwood formula the favorite elements of C&C, particularly its entertaining and immersive single player experience, return in new and vibrant glory. Command & Conquer 3 brings back all that was good about old school RTS gaming. Newer gamers will also enjoy C&C 3’s rich single player campaign. Anyone who is a fan of the RTS genre should find this title a refreshing rework of the old RTS giants and C&C 3 by far is the best RTS game to be produced in the late 2000s.