Tempest Rising Review Summary

Poor UI Design

AI Cheating Difficulty

Lack of Uniqueness

Not Like Old School C&C

Stripped-Down C&C Clone

Simplistic Gameplay

Poor Tutorial and Unit Selection

Poor Balance and AI Pathfinding

Camera control limitations hinder gameplay experience but not game-breaking for the reviewer, who otherwise enjoys the game. The issue is a design oversight rather than a technical bug, leading to a moderate risk score as it may not prompt a refund but is a notable annoyance.

Tech Tree Gated by Kills

Boring Campaign and Voice

The game is criticized for incorporating modern RTS tropes (population limits, hero units, skill trees) that deviate from the classic C&C experience, leading to disappointment. The reviewer implies the game is not a true C&C successor, which is a significant design flaw for fans of the original series.

The reviewer acknowledges potential but points out missing features (superweapons, more races, cranes, more maps) that make the game feel incomplete for its price. This is a content deficiency issue, leading to a moderate risk score as the reviewer does not explicitly request a refund but suggests the game is overpriced.

The reviewer finds the game boring and lacking a custom mode like older RTS games, leading to a very short playtime and strong negative sentiment. The high risk score reflects the explicit disappointment and likely refund decision.

A group of friends cannot play co-op against bots due to the lack of 8-player maps, which is a significant content omission for multiplayer fans. The reviewer calls it a useless purchase, indicating a high risk of refund.

The reviewer expected a modern C&C but found mobile game-like mechanics, which is a design direction issue. The strong negative reaction indicates a high risk of refund.

The camera zoom and building scale break the C&C feel, leading to a refund request. This is a critical design flaw for a C&C fan, resulting in a very high risk score.

The game fails to evoke the C&C atmosphere due to English videos and altered gameplay. This is a design mismatch for fans, leading to a high risk score.

The reviewer finds the game lacking in faction variety and build diversity, which is a content issue. Despite enjoying core mechanics, the lack of variety prevents a recommendation, leading to a moderate risk score.

The reviewer highlights a missing gameplay feature (units not shooting while moving) and finds the game boring and unmemorable, explicitly requesting a refund. This is a critical design flaw, leading to a high risk score.

The reviewer feels the game is incomplete compared to C&C3, with a subtle but noticeable deficiency. This is a content/quality issue, leading to a moderate risk score as the reviewer cannot recommend but does not explicitly refund.

The campaign is a major disappointment, with unit side abilities and focus issues. The reviewer finds the game not worth its price, indicating a high risk of refund.

Infantry units are useless and cannot garrison buildings, while vehicles are superior. This balance/design issue makes the game feel like a poor copy of C&C, leading to a high risk score.

The game is criticized for having too little content (only 2 factions, 10 maps) for its price, with graphics not compensating. The reviewer states it's worth max 20 euro, indicating a high risk of refund.

Lack of Content

Game Crashes and Poor Support

AZERTY Keyboard Incompatibility

Poor UI Design

Cutscene Audio Issues

Crash on Loading Screen

The reviewer is extremely frustrated with unclear objectives and poor controls, making the game unplayable. This is a critical technical/design failure, leading to a very high risk score and likely refund.

The reviewer experiences severe balance issues, with AI swarming and defenses being ineffective, making the game frustrating and unplayable even on easy difficulty. This is a critical technical/balance failure, leading to a very high risk score.

The UI and controls feel outdated, making the game uncomfortable for modern RTS players. This is a technical/design issue that reduces playability, leading to a moderate risk score.

Poor Balance and AI Pathfinding

Dead Multiplayer Community

The reviewer notes a low player population but finds the game acceptable with bots. This is a community issue, but the risk is moderate as the reviewer does not express strong dissatisfaction.

The reviewer could not find any open multiplayer lobbies, indicating a dead community. This is a critical social issue that directly impacts the multiplayer experience, leading to a high risk score.

The multiplayer community is dead, making the game unplayable for those seeking online matches. This is a critical social issue, leading to a high risk score.

A group of friends cannot play co-op against bots due to the lack of 8-player maps

Lack of Content