Carrier Command: Gaea Mission

About

"Carrier Command: Gaea Mission" is a tactical combat game where players control a massive aircraft carrier. The objective is to explore, dominate and defend islands in a vast archipelago, using land, sea, and air units. Players can customize their carrier and units, and engage in real-time battles against AI or human-controlled opponents. The game offers a mix of strategy, action, and exploration in a detailed and dynamic open world.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player

Carrier Command: Gaea Mission screenshot

+13

44%

Audience ScoreBased on 1,459 reviews

story78 positive mentions

stability74 negative mentions

The game has a unique blend of RTS and FPS elements, allowing players to control units directly or issue commands from a strategic view.
Graphics are visually appealing, with nice weather effects and detailed environments that enhance the gameplay experience.
The concept of commanding a carrier and customizing units adds depth and strategic planning to the gameplay.

The AI pathfinding is severely flawed, often causing units to get stuck or behave erratically, leading to frustrating gameplay.
The campaign features poorly executed FPS segments that detract from the overall experience and feel unnecessary.
The game suffers from frequent crashes and bugs, making it difficult to enjoy the gameplay without interruptions.

story
494 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
16%
72%
12%
The story of *Carrier Command: Gaea Mission* has received mixed reviews, with many players finding it lackluster and poorly executed. Critics highlight the uninspired plot, weak voice acting, and numerous bugs that detract from the overall experience, often describing the campaign as a tedious tutorial rather than an engaging narrative. While some appreciate the game's attempt to blend strategy and action, they feel the story fails to provide a compelling backdrop for the gameplay, leading to frustration and disinterest.
- “Carrier Command: Gaea Mission is an intricate and captivating game that managed to keep me engrossed for a solid 40 hours.”
- “The story for the campaign is a nice touch.”
- “Remake of a classic with a great story to go with it!”
- “The story mode is just a glorified tutorial with bad voice acting.”
- “The story is terrible and the cutscenes ruin the entire flow of the game.”
- “The story itself is initially very unclear and does not begin in any manner that could be described as 'compelling'.”
gameplay
314 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
23%
62%
15%
The gameplay of "Carrier Command: Gaea Mission" is characterized by a mix of RTS and FPS elements, offering players control over various units and resources, which can be engaging. However, many reviews highlight significant issues such as poor AI, clunky controls, and repetitive mechanics that detract from the overall experience. While the game has potential with its unique concepts and graphics, it suffers from bugs and a lack of polish, leading to a frustrating gameplay experience for many players.
- “The gameplay itself is incredibly entertaining.”
- “In conclusion, Carrier Command: Gaea Mission is a decent game that delivers tens of hours of engaging and distinctive gameplay.”
- “Gameplay is very unique; it combines FPS, RTS, and strategy all in one. It's like playing Battlefield + Command & Conquer, allowing you to take control of any unit and play with them in first-person or third-person view.”
- “The RTS gameplay, which is the bulk of the game, has a lot of promise, and being able to take control of units manually is very nice, but the AI piloting is lacking and regularly gives cause for frustration to the point where manual control becomes a thing you sort of need to do instead of a 'nice to have' feature.”
- “Gameplay is extremely slow and tedious with not much variety.”
- “The gameplay just seemed very forced and to 'set up'.”
graphics
252 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
49%
41%
10%
The graphics of the game receive mixed reviews, with some players praising the atmospheric visuals and detailed environments, particularly for a title released in 2012. However, others criticize the outdated elements, such as poor character models and graphical bugs, which detract from the overall experience. While many appreciate the aesthetic and weather effects, there are significant concerns about performance issues and inconsistencies in graphical quality.
- “The graphics are incredible, the controls are good, the sound is good, I just like it.”
- “For a game made back in 2012, Carrier Command: Gaea Mission still holds its own in both graphics and gameplay.”
- “The graphics are beautiful, certainly, but I felt a little betrayed by the trailers which appeared to promise a trifecta of gameplay.”
- “The graphics are bad, the controls are crap, you can even aim (you will just slightly zoom into the screen), the story is lame, the gameplay is lame, etc. you can’t even jump in this game.”
- “Many shortcuts were taken with graphics (for example, the manta engine turbines don't even turn! destroy a building and the rubble is a static picture that moves upwards, a step back in realisticness even from older games), the sound (manta engines are instant-on, no spooling up sounds, the walrus engine is silent if going uphill but the wheels are slipping, the wheels move but there's no sound!), basic game engine (destroy a resource island's resource buildings, that island still generates full resources - the buildings are just there for show without serving any actual in-game purpose. destroy an entire island except the command center, leave the island and return and everything is instantly rebuilt!, the mouse control is difficult with lack of control over excessive mouse acceleration).”
- “The graphics are the worst (the 90s called, they want their engine back).”
stability
76 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
3%
97%
The game is widely criticized for its numerous bugs and stability issues, including frequent crashes, poor AI pathfinding, and glitches that significantly hinder gameplay. While some players acknowledge improvements after updates, many still find the experience frustrating and unpolished, leading to a consensus that the game remains "buggy as hell." Despite its interesting concept, the overall stability detracts from the enjoyment, with many reviewers recommending caution before playing.
- “Runs great on my old rig.”
- “Buggy pathfinding, constant crashing (with a poor save system), AI that cheats and skips tech levels, terrible tacked-on campaign that literally starts out as a janky FPS, the ability to get stuck in the map, an AI that can take your islands without any resistance no matter how defended they are unless you rush to their aid, and many more little issues drag this game down.”
- “Pathfinding glitches and issues render the game unplayable.”
- “This is a bloated, buggy mess that has so many pointless distractions that it just is a bore and bummer to play.”
music
26 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
46%
42%
12%
The music in the game receives mixed reviews, with some players appreciating the epic battle themes while others find the transitions jarring and disruptive to the voice acting. Although the soundtrack is noted as decent, many feel it lacks variety and depth, especially given the lengthy campaign duration. Overall, while the music is generally considered good, it is overshadowed by technical limitations and inconsistent sound design.
- “The music is great and the graphics are nice.”
- “Nice graphics, nice story, nice music, good gameplay. I didn't find any important bugs or glitches.”
- “I really liked the graphics, music, and the general concept of the game - being a FPS/RTS game.”
- “I had to constantly lower the music volume because it would shift between epic sounding battle music and then some people loudly wailing in my ears as I was trying to hear the voice actors.”
- “The graphics aren't bad, and the sound effects were alright, but honestly I could have just played this with the sound off and been just as happy not to listen to any more of the voice acting or music.”
- “-the soundtrack is around 25 minutes, and frankly doesn't come close to cutting it, considering the campaign can last 15+ hours.”
grinding
24 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The grinding aspect of the game is widely criticized for its tedious and slow-paced gameplay, with many players finding it boring and lacking in variety. The mechanics, such as unit restoration and island takeover, contribute to a frustrating experience, often leading players to abandon the game due to the excessive waiting and repetitive tasks. While the game boasts impressive visuals, the overall enjoyment is diminished by the monotonous grind.
- “Instead, gameplay is extremely slow and tedious with not much variety.”
- “I stopped playing by the third island because of how tedious and slow the game was.”
- “Unfortunately, the original game's tediously slow pacing (that was fun in 1989) is copied with perfection, as are fundamental elements of the game's design that leave the player stuck waiting for resources to generate.”
optimization
18 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
6%
16%
78%
The game's optimization is widely criticized, with players reporting severe technical issues, frequent crashes, and poor AI performance that hampers gameplay. Many users noted that the AI units are poorly programmed, leading to frustrating pathfinding and targeting problems, while overall graphical quality remains subpar even at high settings. Despite some interesting environmental effects, the game's optimization issues significantly detract from the overall experience.
- “I'm also still astounded by the fact that there are many different weather conditions that affect you, not only in vehicle performance, but for the visual aspect of it. For example, a rainstorm makes it harder for you as a player to see what you're doing, and the psychological aspect is especially delivered with the weather and environmental depth of the game.”
- “The game literally revolves around the use of AI-controlled units which are so poorly optimized that the pathing is incredibly bad.”
- “That's not all, the AI that this game revolves heavily around is so poorly optimized that your anti-tank equipped units will fruitlessly shoot at airborne targets and vice versa with the AA units. What's worse is that they won't switch targets to hit the appropriate enemy units, so you literally have to babysit a total of 8 dumb AIs!”
- “Optimization is terrible, and even at the highest quality, character models look awful.”
humor
16 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is largely derived from its quirky elements, such as the protagonist's hilariously off British accent and the absurdity of AI pathfinding issues, particularly with walruses and vehicles getting lost. Players find amusement in the game's bugs and oddities, like hearing wildlife sounds underground, although these elements can also detract from the overall experience. While the game has potential, the humor often stems from its frustrating mechanics rather than intentional comedic design.
- “The British accent of the protagonist is hilarious. Can't tell if it's real or not, but it definitely sounds off.”
- “It has a huge amount of potential, but there are so many bugs, so much stupid AI, and so much lack of attention to detail by the programmers (i.e. hearing bird chirps and wildlife sounds while deep underground in the bowels of a research center - kinda funny actually).”
- “The vehicles can often get lost by themselves, often with hilarious results, not to mention some odd physics.”
replayability
10 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
20%
60%
20%
The game's replayability is generally viewed as commendable, with many players appreciating its engaging content. However, the absence of multiplayer options is seen as a significant drawback, limiting the potential for varied experiences against other players. Overall, while the game offers substantial replay value, the lack of competitive play may hinder long-term engagement for some.
- “The game's replay value is commendable.”
- “The game is great and has tons of replay value.”
- “Even if it doesn't have replayability.”
- “Lack of multiplayer cripples replayability - it would be brilliant vs. another human.”
atmosphere
8 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
25%
25%
The game's atmosphere is praised for its atmospheric graphics and overall visual appeal, creating an enjoyable experience. However, the cutscenes and voice acting are criticized for lacking depth and feeling uninspired, detracting from the otherwise immersive environment. Overall, the balance of design elements contributes positively to the game's aesthetic.
- “This is an excellent game with atmospheric graphics, moderate tactical depth, and thoughtful missions.”
- “Love the controls and atmosphere.”
- “I love the look; the graphics are neat (if a bit 2005), great atmospherics, and an overall joy to look at. The vehicles are well-designed too; not too gimmicky and far-out future-feel, it's all nicely balanced.”
- “The aforementioned cutscenes are on the whole horrible, the voice acting is wooden and they somehow feel devoid of any atmosphere or effort.”
emotional
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players report mixed emotional experiences with the game, citing physical discomfort and nausea due to clunky controls and poor mouse sensitivity. While some appreciate the ability to escape daily stress without becoming overly emotionally invested, others find the gameplay negatively impacts their enjoyment and well-being.
- “I get to think just hard enough to forget the day's woes but not too emotionally invested where I feel drained following a session.”
character development
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Character development in the game is criticized for being poorly executed, with players expressing frustration over initial bugs and a lack of engaging character progression. Many feel that these issues significantly detract from the overall experience.
- “The game starts off on a really bad note, but after 15 minutes of bugs and nail-bitingly bad character development, I think I have had enough of this game.”

59%Critics’ scoreBased on 1 critic reviews

Carrier Command: Gaea Mission review
This much belated franchise-resurrection trips in execution due to unit pathfinding issues and the lack of multiplayer.
Pcgamer.com
59%

Buy Carrier Command: Gaea Mission

27h Median play time

25h Average play time

14-42h Spent by most gamers

*Based on 10 analyzed playthroughs

Videos

81%4.3kreviews

Carrier Command 2

2021

Tactical Simulation

This game contains adult content

66%3.3kreviews

Cortex Command

2012

Shooter

76%3.6kreviews

Silica

2023

Shooter

67%407reviews

WARSHIFT

2016

Role Playing

This game contains adult content

66%5.5kreviews

The Bureau: XCOM Declassified

2013

Tactical Shooter

75%2.4kreviews

Total Conflict: Resistance

2023

Shooter

67%2.8kreviews

Act of Aggression

2015

Casual Real-time Strategy

61%587reviews

Void Destroyer

2015

Real-time Strategy

This game contains adult content

28%533reviews

Arma Tactics

2013

Tactical Turn-based Strategy

58%9.1kreviews

Homeworld 3

2021

Real-time Strategy

Carrier Command: Gaea Mission

Platforms

About