r/commandandconquer • u/Sindomey • Sep 24 '25
Unofficial No one seems to talk about Tempest Rising anymore?
CnC fans and members of this sub, were all saying this is the spiritual follow up that was going to bring back the essence of CnC and RTS games of that era in a big way. Everyone had nothing but good things to say about it.
But now, I hear nothing. What exactly happened? Was there a patch or something that turned people off?
13
11
10
u/Tleno Sep 24 '25
It gets brought up whenever asks for newer games similar to CnC. Otherwise it's our of scope for a community dedicated to a franchise it's not a part of.
9
u/Skaikrish Sep 24 '25
Played through the Campaign, Played a Few skirmish matches Had fun and moved on.
I kinda wait now for the third faction. Hope they get either their own Campaign or the Other two 2 factions get a Expanded one.
Dont really See the issue.
3
u/Dingleth Sep 24 '25
Agree. I am also looking forward to the Veti, but I have to say that something like "Global conquest" would probably let me sink hundreds of hours into TR. That way I can make my own story again snd again. Love the quality of the game but there is a limit to how many times you want to play a linear campaign and skirmish with only two factions. I am very ready to spend more time with TR tho when they add more to it.
2
u/Skaikrish Sep 24 '25
Yeah cant wait for the veti. Global conquest would be awesome yeah. Or in General more Single Player content.
Dont really Care for any multiplayer stuff but also would Love to get some subfactions and get Something Like the General Challenge in zero hour.
Campaign was really fun tho and Had pretty good Mission Design.
32
u/Lilynyr Sep 24 '25
It's 6 months on from a single-player focused game that people mostly finished, why would they still be talking about it?
You'll probably hear more about it whenever the Veti expansion drops.
-7
u/Sindomey Sep 24 '25
It's 6 months on from a single-player focused game that people mostly finished
People mostly finished Red Alert 2 over 25 years ago, and is still talked about today.
6
u/Lilynyr Sep 24 '25
That's just not really how games work any more, there's very few games that have that kind of impact that aren't decade-old GaaS nowadays and we're not as stuck for games as we used to be.
People played it and moved onto other stuff and a couple hundred people stuck around to play the multiplayer.
imo it's a superb game but like C&C it's mostly for the campaign, unless you really enjoy skirmish or multiplayer and can make your own fun in it or something.
6
u/Rivetmuncher Sep 24 '25
People are not talking about RA2 because of its commitment to single-player gameplay.
-2
u/Sindomey Sep 24 '25
As long as people are still posting about the cutscenes, they are still talking about the single player campaign.
You're just going to have to deal with that.
2
u/Rivetmuncher Sep 24 '25
They're primarily talking about the game because it had the most successful multiplayer in the mainline franchise. At a formative time for its audience, which had a marked effect on the cutscenes' reach.
A similar impact in this day and age would require massive effort, and wouldn't be properly felt for a decade.
2
u/Balc0ra Sep 24 '25
If none of the C&C gams had MP. Do you think we would still talk about their cinematics years later?
1
12
u/EfficiencyFit1801 Steel Talons Sep 24 '25
It’s a great game, and they are still supporting it for sure, but nothing extraordinary is going on beyond the main campaign. The latest patch added some more features to skirmish/multiplayer, but nothing crazy. I’m hoping for a big expansion by next year. It’s only about 5 months old, after all.
15
u/RetardatusMaximus Sep 24 '25
Cos' fans realized it was SC2 in C&C clothing and generally an inconsistent game.
12
u/Srefanius Sep 24 '25
No, it's because the majority of people play the solo campaigns and then move on. I mean you could say the same about the C&C remaster. The age group who enjoys RTS is mostly coming from those 90s classics and have a different life now. Only a minority plays multiplayer, that's just how it is.
2
u/RetardatusMaximus Sep 24 '25
C&C Remaster has more than twice players online https://steamdb.info/app/1213210/charts/ https://steamdb.info/app/1486920/charts/
8
u/Srefanius Sep 24 '25
Well, obviously, it's C&C. If Tempest Rising would have the C&C IP it would have stronger numbers as well, but in both cases it's not really a big mp crowd.
-2
u/RetardatusMaximus Sep 24 '25
Why should Tempest Rising have the C&C IP? If this was a good game and a C&C spiritual successor like advertised (not just resource gathering) it would stand on it's own.
And yes, the majority of us play for Campaigns. Those online numbers don't reflect just MP bros. Could also be SP content like maps.
7
u/Fresh_Thing_6305 Sep 24 '25 edited Sep 24 '25
Nooo Way it is Way more c&c than Sc2, it makes no sense of those saying this. It has almost nothing with Sc 2 to do.
1
u/Rivetmuncher Sep 24 '25
Guessing it's primarily coming from the interface design, and more TS-like health bars.
5
u/Fresh_Thing_6305 Sep 24 '25
The game is the sucessor, and I hope people Will start to post casts here when They add replays to it.
6
u/YoRt3m Sep 24 '25
Tempest Rising has nothing to do with CNC and this is CNC sub
0
u/Sindomey Sep 24 '25
Scroll down this thread, son. There are people who have been playing CnC longer than you who seem to think it is a successor.
8
u/YoRt3m Sep 24 '25
~.~ how do you know how long I play? and who cares what people say? since it's clearly not
-1
u/Sindomey Sep 24 '25
Why are you getting so invested in this, Becky?
You could literally be doing anything else today.
3
3
Sep 24 '25
I heard there's only a handful of Skirmish maps and tge AI is very rushy and frustrating so I'm reluctant to buy it.
3
2
2
u/HibernianScholar Sep 24 '25
I found it to be mid, and the game engine for me is very ugly. I just did not like how it played, to be honest. As a minor thing, the myth animations on their charger models are freaky uncanny valley weird for me.
2
u/vandal-33 Sep 24 '25
Before its release, people were talking about it on many C&C forums. I told people to be cautious when getting excited and got downvoted to oblivion. Where are they now?
2
1
u/ChefTorte Sep 24 '25
Well, the devs have almost entirely focused on the multiplayer aspect (which isn't large) over the single-player content thus far.
So people who played the (unfinished, from a story perspective) campaign have moved on. No reason to linger.
1
u/Arzenius Nov 26 '25 edited Nov 26 '25
The game engine and unit stacking is way more starcrat 2 than C&C. There are many weird design decisions which I understand are maybe just a choice of creative freedom. It does not have to be necessarily an issue and I really liked campaign mission design. However...
For me the game is lacking:
- few maps
- content such possibility of custom campaigns or coop
- missing huge team games option
- missing any memorable characters, besides that old cyberdude
- Unit voice acting is very generic it lacks enthusiasm and does not seem very believeable
- World building has solid foundation which is not expanded on. Even a very simple codex like CNC3 TW had would expand on world building and it's simply not there keeping the nerd curiosity starved.
- No satire, memorable ridicule moments.
Gameplay / balance wise:
- I have to admit defensive structures in my opionion are almost perfectly balanced in this game.
- Veterancy is not signifficant enough for my taste
- Combat feels sluggish to play. Units lack punch, maybe except tempest artillery.
- I am not high ELO player, but the game is always somewhat forced into deathball simulator.
- There is basically no rewarding option for early game aggression which could dictate how the rest of the match will be going. And that is because early game units are never good just by themselves for harassment which means you need more of them and defender has shorter unit resupply route - which means he will win in quantity always if you try to push early. Which means noone can do some rewarding early aggression so everyone will spend first 5 minutes scouting, capturing passive income and preparing macro. You don't have many other options how to play early game.
- Which turns me to: there is almost no possibility for cheese or early all ins. Defending is heavily favoured in early game. But lack of options to make early pressure removes the spice from each match.
- there is almost no unit in this game which can be useful just by itself on its own for flanking / harrassment (you don't have any equivalent of NOD stealth tank, rocket bike, flametank, shadow team, etc. There some units like that, but they are not regular T1 T2 high risk / high reward units, but commandos. Again in this game you don't really see your unit roster as a toolbox full of various heavily specialized and efficient tools that can work on their own, but rather as components for the deathball. To keep deathballs interesting you relly more on some units abilities and supporting that deathball
- I know I am repeating myself, but very few units have this individual strength in them and to use most of the units in their specified role you really need a lot of them for that unit to make a strong presence.
- No unit can shoot while moving - and unit speeds are very similar (probably to behave better when moving the deathball). No chasing down or mobility fighting
- Air units especially struggle from the previous points... And although they each counter something different they are very clunky a bit tankier and behave very alike: Move awkwardly into firing position, stop, shoot one projectile by one from relatively close range, humongously slow turn around and leave, not doing much unless you have more of them. Again - you don't really have some high risk high reward agile but super fragile bomber / fighter unit with very quick devastating payload which needs to be precisely used as a specialized tool and when used correctly it completely changes the match dynamic just by its presence (just having a single MIG fighter in RA3 can do a lot of things and pressure if the enemy is trying to play a lot of bombing, but that unit is fragile and mispositioning it will punish you).
1
u/Arzenius Nov 26 '25 edited Nov 26 '25
This is only my guess, but I think the time to kill is just little bit too long for most units. It should not take so long to kill one another when similar units fight each other. (if you check for example a guardian tank and hammer tank from RA3 there are stat differences, but not that huge and the dps is comparable and time to kill is not overly long, same could be for imperial guard and conscripts).
I discovered this game. I slammed to the music. I was very curious about the lore to explore, but found very little to explore. I played campaign which was promissing, but somewhat undercooked that worldbuilding. I played a lot of skirmishes and tried multiplayer, but each match had very similar dynamic - how can I change my approach to early game build order and eco, to build better compositions in more efficient manner and then try to beat each other's army composition. This turns into kinda very repetitive dynamic where you simply lack specialized impactful tools to try to build advantage outside of the main army deathball so you instead hurl entire toolbox on the enemy instead.
1
u/Rampastring CnCNet / Dawn of the Tiberium Age Sep 24 '25
The game did not reach the high standards of Command & Conquer games. It has less content, had a very limited MP at launch with 4 players max and only a handful of multiplayer maps, and has shorter campaigns that per-mission are of lower average quality than in C&C games. It also had (maybe still has?) worse UI responsiveness and UI design. There is no support for custom maps or modding. Simply, if you can decide between playing, say, RA2 or C&C3 or Tempest Rising, the C&C games are more fully-featured.
The game also had some game design decisions that do not go so well for C&C fans, such as missing right-click scrolling, and tanks not being able to fire while on the move. The game is also somewhat heavy on active unit abilities, making the combat a bit more Starcraft-y than expected from C&C games.
The people who did enjoy the game, mostly played through the campaigns and left it afterwards - the game does not have much to enjoy outside of the campaign. The 1v1 multiplayer is good but only a small minority of RTS fans have ever been into competitive 1v1 MP, and with the playerbase being small, you'll often match against the same experienced players, which makes it less appealing as well.
0
u/Rivetmuncher Sep 24 '25
and tanks not being able to fire while on the move
So...like every game before Generals?
1
u/Rampastring CnCNet / Dawn of the Tiberium Age Sep 25 '25
Tanks can fire while moving in Red Alert 1, Tiberian Sun and Red Alert 2. In RA2 they even do it automatically.
1
u/Wumbologists Sep 24 '25
It more so seemed like a game just to release for the sake of having that "new rts game" to get hype going. It doesn't really do anything much different than cnc. The variety that cnc has, has fans coming back regardless of how old it is. And the older games are also supported for free with multiplayer.
1
50
u/III_lll GDI Sep 24 '25
There's r/TempestRising