This is a greatest WW2 game. The A.I. is so much better than other WW2 games. The grapics are okay they have a Band of Brothers kind of feel to them. The sound is outstanding. There is never a quite moment in the game and feels like you are in a thick fire fight. Soliders yell and bullets fly over your head with dirt land on your screen, when a near by explosion ocurrs. The game runs great on my PC and i have a 1.3 GHz, with 512 Rdram, a ATI Radeon 9800 128 MB video crad and it runs great. Load times arn't even an issue they are not long at all. Some hard core Call of Duty players might be turned of by the game because they are a super solider. Give it a chance because if you compared the 2 games you feel a little scared of this one, the reason being that you die fast in Brothers in Arms. So you might get fustrated for a while. Play the game, it's fun and different.… Expand

This game is based on the hype around band of brothers, saving private ryan and like movies. Not that this is bad, but you need to add something original to stand out and not get boring. The developers did not try. they slavishy put everything what is part of the band of brothers trade in it: the melancholic overvoice, the dramatic music(stings!!! more strings!!!) and the reluctant hero(s). What is a pity is that you can't skip these ramblings of fantasy and you are forced to sit through them all. And then what is it? The game can best be described as a simple squad based shooter. It is basic because they stripped the shooter part to it's bare minimum: you can''t run, lean, lie down and aim properly. And even when you get close to a german you notice that your weapons are underpowered. It takes a full clip to kill one. An strinking example of this weakness is the grenade. When it detonates, you need to be very close to get harmed, less than a meter, and then it does hardly any damage or fails to stun opponents. Of course this was done on purpose. If this was a call of duty with a team added to it, you might ditch the team and go on your own. Because you would do this because your teammates are to stupid to be left on their own and need constant watching. So to prevent you from dumping them and to force you to work with the team they make you weak. But amazingly enough, the team tactics are very basic too: you can't command indvidual members nor assign members to groups, or arm them as you want them and you can only give them a few basic commands. In addition the game is very scripted. As in a shooter you run along one path. In this game however the path has somewhat been widened to allow you to 'Flank the enemy'. Because that is what the developer hit upon. Each and everytime the germans conveniently appear in small groups consisting of 2 to 4 men, take up position behind some cover where they stay until you have killed them. You assign one team to pin them, and you or another team move in from the flank. Luckily the german will fall for this same tactic each and every time. Germans won't attack you except in scripted moments or pin your team even if you are under fire from a mg, they leave their positions open to flanking fire and rear attacks, won't shift their positions,leave strongpoints open to the rear and won't cover the approaches or each others positions, and setup mg's and guns only to shoot out to one direction and finally: germans seldom use grenades(but we know why now). Brothers in Arms therefore quickly becomes boring. If you want proper based squad based game I would advise to try out SWAT IV or Rainbow Six.… Expand

Poor techincally speaking, but with great atmosphere surely the game has it flaws and they're quite annoying (poor AI, a l'le bit outdated graphics, poor interaction, linear gameplay) but for a BandofBrothers' fan could be interesting.

I rate this highly because i loved call of duty and medal of honor. i have been searching for the expansion pack of COD( united offensive) , but in vain..... i hope this game will be released in this part of the world(india) very soon, so that avid gamers like me can really enjoy FPS's like these.... by the way, when is it releasing in india????

Graphics ok, enemy voices gets repetitive within 5 minutes. Animation is pretty bad, characters stick their guns through their arms. Tanks are unable to go over a 50cm earth wall or shoot through and overturned wooden cart. Tanks are unable to reverse, they'll rather show their rear to a panzerfaust. Squadmates are unwilling to jump the smallest obstacle and will instead run right out in front of enemy MGs. The game keeps telling you to flank the enemy, but then you run into invisible barriers. All in all a good try, but not very well executed.… Expand

Graphics are great and sounds are greater. Very Realistic indeed...

Really disappointed. It's overrated for sure!! can't complain about that! i've played so many WWII games in the last couple of years and this one is just "mediocre". The graphics are poor but i think that the engine has his limitations. Poor gameplay, always the same situation again and again!! Even if CoD is more arcade, i think it's better. For me the best tactical WWII Shooter is H&DII and his addon even with it's own problems.… Expand

I thing this game is better than Call of Duty. Allies aren`t dying here on every corner. It`s more realistic. Sounds are great, graphic could be better.

Big Disappointment. As realisitic as a chocolate kettle.

Gameplay seems quite funny, at least in the beginning. Unfortunately, being a PC game, it totally lacks the graphic and audio component. "Outdated" was the first thing I thought when I installed this game. Poor, very very poor details. Bad animations. Choppy ramerate even on high-end machines (22-30 fps when lucky). Good voice-comments though.

I'm serious about the 5 rating. Not as good as the reviews lead you to believe. Wait a while and read player opinions on the forums. 1. Team commands are too simple. Either "follow me," "take cover," "covering fire," or "charge." A real step back from superior games like Operation Flashpoint where you can go stealth, re-assign soldiers to groups, etc. The soldiers pretty much shoot anything but miss when up close! You can't tell one to man a machine gun. The game essentially becomes an exercise of telling them to go there, go there, go there whenever you see a part of the "maze" where they can hide behind. 2. The "maze" factor is really annoying. Again, no comparison to Operation Flashpoint where you can really flank opponents by going anywhere ...not just around the enemy on a boring maze route that is so obvious it takes 10 seconds to find it. 3. Multiplayer is pretty frustrating. Its hard to find a server, you can't use server filters, you can't even refresh the server listing. Usually by the time you select a server it is already full or disconnected. Setting up your own game and waiting 20 minutes for other players is not fun, either. Once in the game, the gameplay is pretty simple and not as strategic as reviewers stated. Finally, you can have only 4 players at once in multiplayer...most of the time someone drops out and your stuck with 3. If you really like Call of Duty and scripted combat events, you can ignore this review. You'll enjoy it. If you were expecting a more open-ended adventure using strategic elements, I think you'll be disappointed after about 3 minutes. Eventually, some company will make a combat sim that is easy to play, has good AI, lots of combat options, is open-ended in terms of map landscape, and has decent multiplayer options. Unfortunately, this isn't it.… Expand

I agree that this is an overrated game. Tried this game because of the high Metascore. Poor graphics. Just based on flanking tactics, and gets pretty monotonous and annoying sometimes. Not to mention that pressing F5 gets you to change cameras but not told in the documentation on how to revert to first-person mode.

The graphics are good - some great particle effects, a beautiful soft lighting and some very believable environments with plenty of grass and trees. The gameplay is bit repetetive but still quite enjoyable and at any rate, it is more innovative than games like medal of honour and call of duty - this time there is some strategy to the game :) But two major problems drag this game down; 1. The LOADTIMES are truly horrible - loading a level can take up to three minutes and reloading a checkpoint (quickloading) takes more than 1½ min. In a realistic game where u really cannot afford loosing much hp on any of your 7 men, it is absolutely devestating that u have to spend so much time watching a line grow from the left to the right of the screen. I really dont play the game very much as the 2 min. interruptions get more more frequent as the difficulty increases 2. this game is built un the unreal2 engine - a 2 years old, yet rather powerful, game engine for the pc. And what is this!??!?!?!?!? My framerate was around 5 fps at the beginning of a particular level (not caused by loading issues or too little system memory or graphic memory). bottomline is that Brothers in Arms is a good game, that sadly is spoiled by a poor engine...… Expand

Like some said, quite overrated. It's a game you really want to like, only, after a while I found out that the gameplay in MoH and CoD simply worked better.. unfortunately.

Graphics= good for 2003 map=very small gameplay=not good longevity= disinstalled at day 3 of the campaign if you want a bad game , BIA is for you..

I don't know why people's opinion of this game vary so much, especially about ai. I found the ai in this game to be very good. The only time when there is a problem with the ai is when the engagements are very close. I shoot, and I find that the gun sway isn't as bad as everyone is making it out to be. This isn't as good as CoD, but its pretty good.

Sucked! Repetitive tactics get boring very quickly. If you're a drone, you'll like this game; if you're a human, stay away. I bought this game based on good critics' reviews. Something want terribly wrong here. Were all the critics on drugs, payed off, or just didn't bother playing through more than just a handful of missions. You can't judge a whole game solely based on a first few levels. Critics, play the whole game before providing your two cents worth. This game, although appearing good at the beginning, quickly becomes worthless as you play on. I think that this game will go down in history as the most overrated game ever. At least the users, not the critics, gave it a more fair review, although still a little hight.… Expand

The most realistic WW2 game indeed, I recommend playing it with hard difficulty setting to maximise the immersion. You will die alot, because only one enemy can kill you with a single shot, but once you learn to keep your head down and flank the enemy, it's one hell of a ride! Graphics are good enough- runs smoothly with olde r computers, sounds great- weapons and explosions have a realistic feel in them, Great animations and voice acting- soldiers act like living beings, hiding behind covers and yelling for each other in the heat of a battle. I highly recommend playing this game, you don't even have to like war games that much. Tactical elements and effort they put in realism separates Brothers In Arms from titles like Medal Of Honour and Call Of Duty.… Expand

This game is awful. Repetitive, boring, ridiculous load times, and horrible hit detection. Bad for the time, and equally bad now.

Still love it. Havent played it in years and am still loving it. Play it on Authentic and turn all the assists off and you will have a good fun challenge. Reason its no 10 is because the graphics are fair dated and the voice acting isnt very good. But the gameplay is original and fun, all the people whinging that its repetetive are the clowns who cant play it properlly. Better get back to your COD, little boys. The sounds are excellent, especially for the game of its age. And the story telling and the story in generall is just great, the three BIA games are by far my favourite series. Get it while its cheap.… Expand

Generally ok, too much sappyness and even though it's reality based, not having a crosshair while in a movement mode is really difficult. But the squad-based system is a treat. Also I don't like the idea that I can't go where I want (ie Far Cry ) and get the feeling I'm going down a beaten path.

I am disappointed with the voice overs. I think they missed a great oppurtunity to give the game a real gritty, dark feel. They tried but it seems to come out pretty flaky more often than not. The other small gripe I have is the linear method of attack. It's base of fire and flank...except when trying to flank I ran "out of bounds" with the invisible fence of the map edge. Great graphics and great gameplay with the squad commands.… Expand

Disappointing. Very scripted. All action is based on flanking trick. Outdated graphics. Sound is too quiet and no EAX support.

I play a lot of FPS' and this is quite overrated. It is way too scripted. The maps are much too small. The AI isn't that great, the soldiers have a lot of problems following orders at times so you end up doing a lot on your own. And like other reviewers state all you do is flank enemy positions and then go to the next point and repeat. The game is much too monotonous. Farcry and Call of Duy are better games.… Expand

I've never played a game that got such good industry reviews and failed to come even close to those reviews. I keep thinking I must have played a different game. I just don't get - this game is not fun. It is incredibly repetitive. Every mission - find the enemy, supress the enemy, flank the enemy, kill the enemy. And it's not like you can really choose how you are going to do the above; there is usually only one or two paths to flank.… Expand

Nice game. better than call of duty. not so expensive.

Terrific game. I don't know where all the guff about the graphics is coming from, this game looks sweet. Sure not up to HL2 or Doom3 standards, but it kicks CoD in the pants. The gameplay is deep and certainly can't go rambo all the time. While the situations are the same, the appoach you can take can always be different. Weapons are also historically accurate, in their inaccurate hit area. A deep and engaging game that has frustrated me, but always brought me back. Worthy of all the credit it receives.… Expand

Excellent squad work, Multiplayer is particular than the all matches in all the rest of first person shooters with squad operations, artificial intelligence better than cod and moh, very intersting missions with great action and adrenaline, very good historical recostruction. Very Good purchase!

this game has some neat ideas, but all in all i keep wanting to just play it like a regular shooter and you cant. the artificial missing at some points just gets me angry, i mean you aim at them PERFECTLY and it misses, you need to do the tactical stuff. and come on....if youre going to do a WWII shooter, does it have to be playing as americans in france? every single ww2 game has doen that excpet MOHPA. besides that good.… Expand

This game blows. Absolutely horrible game. MAYBE for 9.99 or something. The graphics are pathetic, the gameplay is boring, the colision detection system is unbelievably bad (ie: you can shoot someone and it doesn't recognize the hit because it obviously doesn't use a per pixel detection system like say UT2004) and all in all the game is very boring. I wouldn't recomend this to anyoine if it's priced over 10 or 15 bucks. go get COD and COD: UO and you'll be MUCH MUCH happier!… Expand

By far the best WW 2 GAME I have EVER played it brings MOA , COD and fullspectrum warrior all into one ... the MP is fun.and for that guy that said the AI is dumb play it on difficult or Authentic for a all out challange.... over and out.

This game is amateur work. Hands down, its amateur work, amateur game. It goes to show that the industry vets should do the innovating, and the newbies should do the polishing. Graphics are fine. Sound effects can be underwhelming, but are balanced out with great voice acting and music. Running speed it good, squad commands are functional. AI could use some work but is good as it is. All the basics to make a tactical, squad based WWII shooter are here. Too bad the Combat isn't. To start off, the shooting mechanics are terrible. Its funny, its like your player, a trained soldier, shoots with the skill of a game developer testing out weapons for his new game, so as to implement realistic recoil effects, without realizing he needs to practice take firearm classes for a month first. Anyway, recoil from guns is totally unrealistic (Trust me, I won 7 guns). Combat is slow, underwhelming, and utterly frustrating. Its also annoying as hell to lose a whole fireteam to a random artillery shell. Overall, actually fighting Nazi's in this game is like sludging through tar, its slow, annoying, and something you don't want to do again. Its like this game never even went through a beta or an alpha stage. Rather than making you play the game the way it was meant to be played (tactically) with streamlined, intuiting gameplay, the creators gave up and just tossed in a few cheap tricks to force you to play how it was meant to. For example, the game doesn't reward patience, smart thinking, or good positioning. This is not like Red Orchestra. Instead, the game makes it impossible to kill anyone with anything other than a chest hit. Why? To FORCE you to flank those behind cover. So even if their heads are exposed, but they're crouched behind cover, you can pour on 100 rounds with a BAR at their helmets and the enemy will just sit there unscratched. This is, ironically, a method to make the game more realistic! This game should have been sent back to the drawing board. This game feels like it never went through any refinement process at all, at least gameplay and level design wise. This game is like playing a beta test. Guns are waaayyyy off, too many of the sound effects sound like place holders, sometimes kooky AI, bad, crappy level design. Usually after a beta test, the team cuts the bad levels out, makes more good levels to make for that, and fine tunes the gameplay. But it just seemed like that never happened here. Instead, the devs just stuffed in some cheap tricks to make you play the game as it was advertised, instead of refining and adding stuff to they "F" system, and published it.… Expand

I had such hopes that this would be a good game, but instead, it was a bad minigame drawn out to cover the plot. The mechanics of the minigame are simple: see the Germans, shot in the general direction of the Germans, tell your squad to stop taking cover from the wrong direction and shoot at the Germans, walk over to the Germans, shoot the Germans. The friendly AI is so useless that despite the levels constant attempts to railroad you into using this tactic, I found it more effective to order my squad to sit in the corner while I single-handedly slaughtered the Germans. The weapons behave as an experienced shooter would expect them too, in the hands of untrained game developers. The German AI compensates for the flaws in the American AI, demonstrating a complete inability to use grenades effectively, cover their flanks or rear, or even utilize the old tactic from Wolf 3d and gang up on the poor Americans. On authentic difficulty, the weapons are still almost completely useless, requiring multiple head and chest hits to bring down a German. Fortunately, the Germans have the same problem, allowing you to simply charge enemy riflemen, emptying the clip of a Thompson into them, and ignoring the hits you take in the process. Perhaps most disappointing was the fact that for all their efforts and attention to detail in historical accuracy, the levels were essentially long clear tunnels. If pinned down by a German machine gun in the street, it might seem reasonable to jump the fence beside the road and take cover in the ditch, move forward and flank, right? Wrong. The fence should be easily cleared, but it is in actuality the base of an invisible wall. Such invisible walls abound, in order to ensure that the path chosen by the game designers is the path the player follows. All in all, this feels less like playing a game, and more like playing a role in a movie, only instead of a script, you simply have a director yelling at you whenever you do anything that isn't what he wants.… Expand

A fairly solid tactical historical shooter. The only major faults are with the contextual commands- occasionally causing you to order your squad to attack when you want them to move, and to mount guns when you want to reload- and the friendly AI occasionally not firing when they have clear shots and not always using cover intelligently, but for the most part they make themselves useful. It also isn't the best looking game given its age, looking obviously like an Xbox port. All that said, it's still an engrossing FPS that's a welcome diversion from arcade-style WWII shooters like the Call of Duty and Medal of Honor games. Worth a go if slower, more cerebral rather than twitchy FPS are your thing.… Expand

Wow!! I've been keeping a close watch on this game and I have been extremely impressed. I am an avid MOH and COD fan so this looks awesome. The squad-based syetem is a great addition to the ever growing World War II genre.

This is a strange game to review. Its graphics feel a bit outdated, it is based on the old unreal engine. But it gives a total new gaming experiance. It is a shooter, but not 'just' a shooter. They build 'a heart' in the game. It has a totally new approach to shooting and I like the gameplay very much. It feels a bit slow, a bit like the old 'operation flashpoint'. Dont know if I would like to raise the score 1 point or lower the score 1 point in a week. Both are possible. Its an interesting game, as a W W 2 freak I am very happy with it. Not a game for a fast and furious FPS gamer. But its a very well done game.… Expand

The big issue with this game on the PC are the bugs. A massive amount of people are currently unable to play it, even on relatively new systems. They are now left in limbo until the developer releases its v1.03 patch. Regardless of whether the game is good or not (and yes it is very good) there can be no forgiveness for rushing the game to the shelves before it has been properly tested on a variety of chipsets. People paying $40+ for a game and meet the minimum system specs on the box should not be left waiting for patches!… Expand

Although the graphics weren't the best I have seen, this was one of the most enjoyable gaming experiences I have had since Half Life 1. The level of realism is outstanding and you really feel like you are there on the battlefield. If you are looking for an arcade style game, look elsewhere, but for a realistic WWII experience, it doesn't get any better than Brothers in Arms. Call of Duty and Medal of Honor don't even come close.… Expand

Quite realistic. Certainly not a game that you can use gung ho tactics in. Forces you t think through each encounter. Nice step up from Call of Duty. Load times are a little on the slow side. 1 minute to start, 30 seconds to restart.

this is by far 1 of the best games iv'e ever played the graphs are pretty good when u think about what year it's made in. i also think this is the only game i ever played that got emotion. the gameplay is great, they did alot into the tactics and it turned out pretty well even if your on the normal level then it's not just run and gun u have to use your sqaud/tank. the only thing about this game that could be better is the weapons they made the M1 garand and other types of rifles in the game a little too unaccurate… Expand