Since when is 86% a bad thing?smokeydabear076

you have to look on the whole picture, 86% is the Average-Score.

"PC Gamer" rated C&C3 very good 90%

"PC Gamer UK" rated C&C3 good 82%

but you're definitely right, 82% is still a good game (but for myself a game with that score is not as good as the RTS-Games i'd like to play)

Other Question, which of this (only) two magazines is more trustworthy? Let's wait and see ;)

PS: i compared some scores from both magazines on Gamerankings:

Game / PC-Gamer / PC-Gamer UK / UserAverage

BfME / 86 / 73 / 79

BfME2 / 90 / 80 / 58

CoH / 96 / 94 / 94

RoN:RoL / 89 / 87 / 84

so far PC-Gamer tends to give too high scores, PC-Gamer UK is closer to the Average Userscore...

the following Games got similar scores

Rome / 92 / 95

Supreme C. / 91 / 90

DoW / 87 / 91

DoW: DC / 79 / 80

IMHO PC-Gamer UK is right, i haven't seen enough depth in this game from the demo

I'm looking forward to the Gamespot Review :)

I'm totally new in the C&C-Series, i played the demo and have to say, that it was quite fun for a while. BUT: i heard from different RTS-Fans that the game lacks depth,... i had such experiences from earlier EA-Games. BfME was such a game, i played it only a few days, 

for sure it is too early to say... i'm waiting for the review. Doesn't look too good for now, Gamerankings Average: 86% / 2 Reviews.  

 actually i'm playing Company of Heroes,  a solid and deep game for me.