Well, even RA1 had its fair share of goofiness, especially the console version which had different cutscenes. (see this or this for example)
In my opinion the Russian ending wasn't that far from truth - it also made me smile, for reasons undisclosed here. The first one about ants, though...
Compared to original C&C, C&C3 is quite censored from actual signs of violence. There are no soldiers blowing up to pieces, no burning victims after flamethrowers, no soldiers trying to some small movements after being hit etc. etc. This is a development direction I oppose, it would be better if they showed the brutality in full scale. Though that would cut off the youngest players, but that is not necessarily a bad idea.
I'm trained as a rifle man, but I recall that shooting with the rifle was only one thing I had to do. RPGs are an integral part of a rifle squad, as are the grenades, active camouflaging, setting minefields, asking for fire support and partly the AAA and so on. Then in C&C, I never understood why I, as a field commander (supposing rank like colonel or above), for example, would specifically need to order a single soldier to throw a grenade, or a minelayer to drop a single mine exactly there
. Those are actions that should happen automatically. Also I'm still wondering why only the combat engineer unit can take control of enemy buildings, if he cannot even shoot - and on top of that cannot help to construct buildings faster?
But then again, C&C and C&C3 are still fun to play, though I time by time end up cursing the suicidal behavior of certain units that don't back up and get repaired or healed automatically. And you can't even issue an order about that!