Metascore
84

Generally favorable reviews - based on 23 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 21 out of 23
  2. Negative: 0 out of 23
  1. 95
    It's one of those sequels where all of the evolution takes place underneath the façade -- a game you've got to pick up and feel all the subtle differences. And of course, if Blood is your first Brothers experience, well, it's hard to imagine going back to anything less authentic and strategic.
  2. It is as good as the previous game, and then some with the enhancements that were made. Most notably, in the computer AI that puts up so much more of a fight than even the best FPS games.
  3. Excellent sense of immersion, great storytelling.
  4. In many ways, Blood feels like the polished game Gearbox couldn't completely nail last time around. Most of the evolution takes place under the hood.
  5. 88
    Only an incremental improvement on the original. The greater flexibility of the AI and the new multiplayer options are certainly welcome additions, but the game still feels... more like Brothers in Arms v1.5 than a full sequel.
  6. Earned in Blood offers a rather similar experience to its excellent predecessor, with improved enemy artificial intelligence and additional multiplayer options. The novelty has worn off just a bit, though.
  7. This intense semi-sequel significantly ratchets up the enemy AI. [Holiday 2005, p.56]
  8. An awesome game and earns a great deal of respect and admiration, but doesn’t quite earn what I wish it would.
  9. More like an add-on than a real sequel. Despite that, Earned in Blood has better AI and is overall better than the first one. The best WW2 team leader game at the moment. [Nov 2005]
  10. Buoyed by extra content, yet lacking a proper sense of real progression from the last outing, it nevertheless remains a well-designed foray that taps into parts of the gaming brain that habitually lie dormant. [PC Zone]
  11. 83
    The fact that you are being asked to pay full premium for what is effectively an expansion pack in all but name, may put some off.
  12. Even with the improvements to the A.I. and enhanced multiplayer experience, the game feels more like an expansion pack than a stand-alone product.
  13. It’s essentially the same game as before, only played from a different angle.
  14. Earned In Blood might not seem like a radical departure from the original but the gloriously cascading AI and open maps have effectively transformed it into a very special WWII experience. The fact that there's nothing quite like it in such a crowded genre speaks volumes. [Dec 2005, p.103]
  15. EiB feels grittier - closer to its fascinating yet fearful inspiration - than any other military shooter out there. Much of that feel comes from the credible mission design and AI already mentioned but a significant portion stems from fundamentals like the way the weapons look, sound and perform.
  16. It's fun and well produced but it's a console version of an expansion pack and nothing more.
  17. Not the advance you may have hoped, but the co-op mode deserves medals. [Dec 2005, p.98]
  18. 80
    From the great use of sound, the sharp graphics, and the innovative use of combat tactics, it's sure to please fans of Road to Hill 30 who want more of that same kind of gameplay.
  19. The first-person caper is satisfyingly immersive thanks to some outstanding graphical touches — heavy rain splatters neatly on Jeeps and we can even see Red’s freckles in close-up. All this detail is demanding, so you will need a fairly powerful PC to prevent the visuals from occasionally chugging.
  20. The levels still feel a little too restrictive, the scripted scenes will break again, and the German AI does tend to show flashes of blinding stupidity.
  21. If it were a thirty dollar expansion pack it would have been lovely... but... it’s just not a good deal.
  22. Marches behind its predecessor as one of the most polished tactical shooters ever released. [Jan 2006, p.44]
  23. There are a couple of perplexing flaws in the design, such as the inability to go prone or jump over low walls and fences, but suspend your disbelief and you'll be gripped.
User Score
7.2

Mixed or average reviews- based on 59 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 18
  2. Negative: 5 out of 18
  1. Sep 29, 2011
    4
    Graphics are pretty bad. The actual gameplay is very repetitive and although it's challenging it certainly isn't fun. Realistic? Maybe. Frustrating, slow and boring? Most likely. It's not really a shooter and although it tries to be different, its flaws start to show when nobody plays multiplayer and the skirmish mode is bad as well. Nice idea, but bad execution. Full Review »
  2. May 2, 2014
    10
    This game, a first person tactical shooter, has probably found the line that unites a simulator with a game, and makes it attractive, functional and realistic. The amount of work and detail put into this game simply make me wish ALL games were as dedicated to their purpose and function, which this game truly succeeds in. The music, scenery, accuracy of the events and passion portrayed and put in this game are unforgettable. Full Review »
  3. Jan 23, 2014
    10
    In comparison with the original Brothers In Arms: Road to hill 30, Earned In Blood made some serious changes that elevated the game to a much higher level while still keeping it's traditional strong points: command system is remains the same so you don't have to learn or adapt anything new, while new weapons were added, which offered players a variety of choices. In my opinion, however, the most significant thing we can recognize in EIB is AI: enemies now are a lot smarter, and they also increase in number. All in all, I barely have anything to complain about Brothers In Arms: Earned In Blood. Full Review »