Command & Conquer: Red Alert 3 Exclusive Hands-On - Empire of the Rising Sun

We get our hands on the third faction of this upcoming strategy sequel and have much to report in this exclusive preview. Also, there were dogs and bears.

Exclusive Video

See Red Alert 3 in motion in this exclusive video.

When they first appeared on the scene, real-time strategy games started off with the basics of harvesting resources, building your base, and eventually churning out an army of toy soldiers to beat up your opponents before they did the same to you. Times have changed. These games have become faster-paced and more streamlined, with better control layouts, prettier graphics, and in the case of EALA's upcoming sequel, they have scout dogs and parachuting bears. Yes, Red Alert 3 may look like Command & Conquer 3's wackier cousin, but as we saw from our exclusive hands-on time with the game, there's also a finely-tuned and deep strategy game within. We had a chance to see and play the game, as well as get an exclusive first look at the all-new Empire of the Rising Sun as well.

Red Alert 3 takes place in an alternate reality in which the Cold War never ended, and all the fantastical scientific research and speculative weaponry of the 20th century actually became a reality. The series previously covered the conflict between the Soviets and the Western forces, but the third game adds a new playable faction, the Empire of the Rising Sun (powered by the fanatical armies of the Japanese).

This intriguing new faction apparently came about as a combination of the development team's plans to create a faction for skilled players who enjoy carefully micromanaging their armies, as well as from the team's favorite video games and pop culture from the Far East. For starters, basically all of Red Alert 3's units in all three factions have a secondary ability (which may either be toggled on or off, have an instantaneous effect, or require some sort of timed "cooldown" until it can be used again), and three of the Rising Sun's most powerful and flexible midlevel units possess the ability to sprout jet engines and take to the air.

This makes these versatile units exceptionally tricky to deal with in groups that are being managed by skillful players, since the game also features a rock-paper-scissors balance of units that travel by land, sea, and/or air, as well as by whether they're infantry or vehicles. Some units are very effective counter-units against ground-based and seafaring enemies and can tear through the Rising Sun's ground-based Mecha Tengu walkers (half-jet, half-robot-walker mechs bear a passing resemblance to the transforming jet/robots from the classic Japanese anime Super Dimensional Fortress Macross) and the swift Seawing submarines (which seem a bit like the transforming light/dark ship from the satisfyingly challenging arcade shooter Ikaruga) like tissue paper. However, both the Mecha Tengu and the Seawing possess the secondary ability of instantly becoming flying units--which can instantly render anti-ground or anti-naval attacks useless, as they become untouchable flyers that can be damaged only by anti-air weapons.

In addition, the Rising Sun is the only faction in the game that isn't shackled with the traditional "build radius"--the requirement of building your structures close to your base. Instead, the faction builds moving cores--small, vulnerable, amphibious wheeled units that can be deployed as buildings (after a delay of several seconds) pretty much anywhere on the map you can move them to, though amphibious units may only cross between land and sea along flat beaches, not off of cliffs.

Still, this feature of the Rising Sun's buildings definitely has its risks and rewards. Skilled micromanagers who can jump between many sites at once can scout aggressively to discover resource nodes and sending along mobile cores to build refineries nearby, supercharging their economies. Building up forward bases of unit-building structures is also a great way to keep the pressure on your opponents and tighten the noose quickly--however, having remote and poorly-defended installations scattered across the map can be a recipe for painful, expensive losses if your opponents also have the presence of mind to scout aggressively, and tear down your remote installations before you can hustle out a defense force.

prev

288 Comments

  • nitsud_19

    Posted Mar 23, 2009 7:15 am PT

    I hope the PS3 version turns out good so i can play with friends.

  • The_Knight2000

    Posted Sep 3, 2008 12:08 am PT

    lol @ Yuriko wearing a schoolgirl's uniform.

  • YoungDollar

    Posted Aug 31, 2008 1:32 pm PT

    Generals was such a better game than CNC3. Micromanaging was better. And it was alot more balance. And they didnt F up the economy like they did KW.

  • UbergamerNL

    Posted Aug 19, 2008 12:07 pm PT

    My thoughts are not the same of KPmaker and RWdaxter's and i want to say something about that. Even if KPmaker has played the beta and het thinks unit spamming is a good shot at a victory hes not right because this game is mostly about 'micromanaging' this comes all with the abilities that all the units have like the black hole armor of the assault destroyer can turn the tides what EALA wants is that u gonna think about your attacks and what the enemy will do and not brainlessly call in heavy units becease even a mid tier unit like the Empire's Shinobi can but a lot of stress to your head it's just like chess you must think a few steps for ward build a good defence en attack force. With the original Naval gameplay in this game it can make a lot of variety in a match. sea air and land are 3 different elements and you will have to rule them all to make a good chance.
    You'll seriously have to know your enemy before you're going for the blind attack because if you dont balance your attack force with all the 3 land sea and air elements youre definitely will be ambushed by a smaller but tactically stronger force because he is micromanaging properly. Last thing on my mind is this argument of Cn3 sucks and CnCG is better people come to realise everybody is different and a individual person and got different taste of games and if u find one who likes that game to then make friends and play together and dont argue with others like thats hes playing a dumb game because otherwise its all gonna be a stupid fanboy war all over again just like that Ps3 vs Xbox 360 stuff because everything has its strong and its weak points.
    I thnik RA3 is gonna be a great game to play online and hope that some of us will play soon online.

    Greets UbergamerNL

    PS: This is all my opinion and thanks for reading and please rate.

  • padejace

    Posted Aug 18, 2008 5:14 am PT

    luisrmg : I'am a st*pid (30 years old) kid waiting for the final release then ! And I like big cartoony explosions on my RTS (oh yeeaaa !!)

  • bazmaz3

    Posted Aug 13, 2008 6:48 am PT

    Well i have played the beta and can say its a great game. Lasting well into 1hr per game with 2 or 4 people, granted some of this time was spent learning the gaming engine etc but still all good fun. Have noticed a few missing bit for a couple of unit but then again its still beta so things may change. I for one can say that i will buy this when it comes out, I have enjoy all the command and conquer games so far.

  • KP_Maker

    Posted Aug 4, 2008 1:46 pm PT

    I really wanted to like this game, but I can confirm that RWDexter's expectations are a 100% correct.

    Unit spamming is in for sure; within 20-25 mins one of my 2 enemies in a 3-way FFA massed 25-30 King Oni's, over 10 of the Japan battleships, over 65 of the flying female infantry unit, and over 50 of the T-Tanks.

    ROFL- this game is only 1 step above C&C3, and the only way I would ever spend money on it would be about a year after release when it is below $30.

  • RWDexter

    Posted Jul 27, 2008 1:13 am PT

    I do not expect much from RA3. I was with C&C since the first 1995 game, and i can say - C&C3 was the worst of them. C&C3 had superior graphics, so what? It was released 4 years after C&CG. Better graphics DO NOT make one game superior to another. If you think otherwise than you are a damn noob who never played online. Besides game should be judged compared to other games of the same generation, not the older ones. C&CG had the second best multiplayer gameplay ever (the first is StarCraft of course). And you know what, C&C3 was the worst game in the series not by the coincidence. It was the first game that was created without Westwood employees. And since RA3 is also pure EA game, i do not hold much hopes for it. C&C3 had the boring tank rush gameplay. Unlike Generals it didn't have hard counter tools like easily available WMDs (atomic gun for example), which made it all about unit amassing. So what do we see here? No visible low level WMDs as well. Unlike Generals, C&C3 didn't have map-control based economy. Though RA3 seems to fix this issue, and probably there will be no unit spamming tactics, but without WMDs or hard counter system it is still going to be all about micro, while C&CG placed the large emphasis on actual tactical choices. In C&C3 there was no faction diversity - Bike=Pitbull, Scorpion=Predator, Buggy=APC, Mammoth=Avatar. Even Scrin had all the same tech tree with the same buildings, though developers have first promised large amount of diversity here. And what do we see in RA3? Every faction has medium tank. Every faction has heavy tank/mech. Every faction has tier2 artillery. Every faction has anti-infantry vehicle. Every faction has VTOL/heli. Every faction has air superiority fighter. Now look at RA2 - where soviets have anti-building artillery, allies get fighter. While soviets get heavy breakthrough tank, allies use anti-vehicle artillery. Instead of kirov allies get anti-infantry ambush tank. And Yuri had even more diverse unitlist. In RA3 EA have at least created quite different tech trees, and we can surely hope that this land/water amphibious function uncompatability thing will bring some amount of diversity. My conclusion is the RA3 is going to be better than C&C3, and probably even playable for the long amount of time, however it will not outshine Generals (and StarCraft 2 to be sure, C&CG author is at work!). Anyway, RA3 beta is at hand, and after one week or so we will be able to tell the right or wrong of my (and many other people's from the community who will agree with me) predictions.

  • AL-Samurai

    Posted Jul 23, 2008 11:21 pm PT

    i love this game

  • stakex007

    Posted Jul 23, 2008 10:10 pm PT

    Red Alert 2 was quite possible one of the best strat games ever... I still play it online till this day, over Generals and C&C3... can't wait for RA3, but I really hope they don't screw it up.

  • lvlUNE3B

    Posted Jul 23, 2008 2:38 pm PT

    After they released Tiberium Wars with not that success. I don't have much hopes from Red Alert 3.
    This is what lupin means.

  • JoyousOblivion

    Posted Jul 23, 2008 3:51 am PT

    Vackillers...you're high right?? You can very easily compare generals to CnC3, and CnC3 was a very superior game. Then again its like comparing Warcraft 3 with Warcraft 1, not exactly same timeline, but you can't deny that WC3 is superior.

    I too own all the CnC games, and own several versions of almost all of them due to damn collector's editions and package sets, so I doubt you're too unique in your collection.

    As for RA2 being awful? That's where you sir, are high. RA2 was a highlight in CnC games, as none save RA1 was even close to as good in terms of gameplay and overall character of game. Really only CnC3 matched the quality that RA2 brought, and its looking like RA3 will be much more the same of RA2, not RA1, though both were great in their time.

  • wokwok

    Posted Jul 22, 2008 12:36 pm PT

    man these is the best game ever i spend hours and hours play the old one may these is petter

  • vackillers

    Posted Jul 22, 2008 12:15 pm PT

    maknathol "CnC3 was far superior to Generals,"
    May i beg ur pardon, but how is cnc3 superior to generals?

    ermmm, CnC3 was bar far, graphicly far more superior to generals! You cannot compare the two as they are in 2 completely different universes, The units act and play completely different!! thats a silly comparison.... Engine might be a re-vamped version of the generals engine, but this in no way makes them the same... I for one own every CnC game and CnC3 i think totally brought the fanchise back from being dead since RA2 as it was awfull compared with RA1.

  • Bit0ZERO

    Posted Jul 22, 2008 3:32 am PT

    I think I'll play ra2 again...

  • jrabbit99

    Posted Jul 21, 2008 6:25 pm PT

    Long live the king!!

  • vackillers

    Posted Jul 21, 2008 11:21 am PT

    I loved the first RA game, so many things in that was so awsome i cant put it all down in here, RA2 was awfull, the graphics were terrible just like tiberium dawn. Now RA3 looks a lot better of course with the new engine but cant help but feel it still has that RA2 cartoon look which absolutely sucks. I cant wait to try out all the navy stuff, and the water effects look asolutely brilliant!! but the cartoon style REALLY spoils a lot for me, thing im hateing most is the stupid colour highlighting around the units that you've selected, it jus looks completely out of place with the enviroment, the units and everything else. The game looks like it could be real fun to play, but i'm waiting for the beta and hopefully get a clearer picture on how its going to play like...

  • Lupin_wb

    Posted Jul 21, 2008 7:09 am PT

    Guys come on, prejudgements :S at least wait until the release

  • DarMar01

    Posted Jul 21, 2008 6:23 am PT

    wow, that song from the video really brings up my memories

  • Wild_SeVen2004

    Posted Jul 21, 2008 12:21 am PT

    Just enjoy the game when its release and stop complaining people.

Check Prices: $19.7 – 49.99

advertisement
advertisement
Click Here

Game Stats

Also on

Games you may like…

Users who looked at content for this game also looked at these games.

See More Similar Games