Conflict: Denied Ops PC

User Score
4.8

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 54 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 54
  2. Negative: 27 out of 54
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Oct 27, 2013
    4
    Two really mediocre characters which you can switch between with a game mechanic that feels like it was put together with sellotape and string. I think the kindest thing I can say about this game is that it's visually ok.
  2. Jun 17, 2012
    0
    The graphics and the sounds very bad. No have story. Don't play and don't buy this game, it's only a waste of time.
  3. DonW
    Apr 6, 2009
    0
    The Conflict games were always my favorite and I always looked forward to new ones, until now. Denied Ops is nothing like past Conflict games. In the future I'll have to research any new Conflict games before I purchase them. If there anything like this one I won't be buying anymore.
  4. NowotnikA
    Feb 25, 2009
    0
    Terrible. As already mentioned, the graphics are atrocious. The gameplay is, too. This is the most buggy and boring game I have played in a LONG time. L(
  5. MahmoodA
    Feb 12, 2009
    0
    This is game made me cry. It is terrible. Please avoid this game even if they give it to you for free.
  6. KarlL
    Aug 16, 2008
    1
    There is nothing good about this game. It feels like a bad game from 1998
  7. ErikM.
    Jul 12, 2008
    1
    Almost unplayable. The game features a poor physics and graphics engine, and virtually no storyline whatsoever. If the opening cutscene with the APC doesnt turn you off, the bizzare, unwieldy controls and half-assed graphics will.
  8. JImmyB
    Jun 6, 2008
    0
    If you give this game any more than a 4 you must not have played a single video game since 1995. The graphics are terrible (worse than most games on Playstation 2!!!), there's only 2 usable guns in the entire game, and the game is just plain dumb. The game is trumped in every single way by modern shooters like Call of Duty 4 and Halo 3. Don't even bother getting this game unless If you give this game any more than a 4 you must not have played a single video game since 1995. The graphics are terrible (worse than most games on Playstation 2!!!), there's only 2 usable guns in the entire game, and the game is just plain dumb. The game is trumped in every single way by modern shooters like Call of Duty 4 and Halo 3. Don't even bother getting this game unless it's in the $5 bargain bin. Or just get a Subway sandwich. Expand
  9. KyleB
    May 4, 2008
    2
    Gave this game a 2 because I actually got to play Co-op with my brother in MN for a while. That was fun, then, it stopped working on Co-op, nobody in Steam answers forums, and neither does Eidos. Lack of support= *&^%$#@! game. BTW Sins of a Solar Empire will cure that!!!
  10. NicholasC
    Apr 27, 2008
    2
    This game is really not that good of a game. If you're going to play this series, stick with an older version like Conflict: Global Terror, which to me seems to have better graphics(sadly) and has 4 player co-op, instead of 2.
  11. BucciG.
    Mar 19, 2008
    0
    The graphics are terrible. I'd expect this game to be on PS2, not PS3. The gameplay is awful with no storyline whatsoever. You only have two guns. Don't waste your time, money and effort.
  12. KeighleyJ.
    Mar 4, 2008
    1
    simply the worst game i have bought in a while save your money don't buy it its about time the advertising was really like the games themself however my 12 year old son liked the game so its a small reprieve so I gave it 1 ,but where oh where can I offload this game its trade in time!
  13. ARCHANGELM.
    Feb 29, 2008
    1
    the graphics superior, playability sucked outright,too many keys too little time, I'd place PlayStation one and a side scroller ahead of this,they need to make things simpler,this is a war venture not politics,as its bad enough to use a voting machine then it is to place a ballot on paper and drop it in a box
  14. DaveR.
    Feb 22, 2008
    1
    Absolutely atrocious. Ugly, buggy, generic, uninspired. The developers don't deserve to make their money back on this waste of time. Buy literally anything else instead.
  15. ZacharyW.
    Feb 16, 2008
    2
    I not motivated enough to even give a proper review of this terrible game. I uninstalled after about an hour. It is the worst FPS I've played in a long time. It is so outdated in every way that it is annoying.
  16. NathanC.
    Feb 15, 2008
    3
    It sucks. Play something else. If you don't believe me, play the demo. It's on Steam. Buy it and waste 40 bucks. Play the demo and see all that the game has in store.
  17. JohnD.
    Feb 14, 2008
    3
    Bad game. As in: BAD game. The scope views look like they were made in Paint.If not,then I know I could do a better sight with Paint.The barrels dont explode when you shoot them: Instead they release energy and make a silly jump to the air while spinning always the same way and fall on the ground to explode. With the gas tanks,they fly away,make some sense.But with standard flammable Bad game. As in: BAD game. The scope views look like they were made in Paint.If not,then I know I could do a better sight with Paint.The barrels dont explode when you shoot them: Instead they release energy and make a silly jump to the air while spinning always the same way and fall on the ground to explode. With the gas tanks,they fly away,make some sense.But with standard flammable barrels? Please. The graphics ain't all that much, the weapons are a bit silly (the Desert Eagle is better than many primary firearms,and the secondary fire modes on many weapons are just unwieldy in real life)and enemy AI is crap. Cover system is lame..and what is the camera vision when peeking from cover for? Use the eyes, gee. Nothing special of a game seriously. Expand
  18. AnonymousMC
    Feb 13, 2008
    0
    This was the most disgusting piece of shit I have seen. For Eidos to have reasonable graphics in Tomb Raider: Legend/Anniversary, and then put out something that makes you want to kill yourself once you set eyes on it... it's awful. They say it features "Massively Destructible Environments," by which I guess they mean you can break boxes and crates. Whoop de doo. The gameplay alsoThis was the most disgusting piece of shit I have seen. For Eidos to have reasonable graphics in Tomb Raider: Legend/Anniversary, and then put out something that makes you want to kill yourself once you set eyes on it... it's awful. They say it features "Massively Destructible Environments," by which I guess they mean you can break boxes and crates. Whoop de doo. The gameplay also sucked. Your teammate is a retard unless you control him. Your enemies won't fall when hit by a hundred bullets but can kill you with one. Weapons are limited and tedious.

    Now, I've only played the demo... but, based on that, I would burn every copy of this shitty game in existence.

    Buy this if you're looking for something to hang yourself by. Otherwise, save $40.
    Expand
  19. ChrisB.
    Feb 13, 2008
    1
    This game is not how I expected it to be. The models were horrible and the game play was lame. The only good thing about this game was probably the hit boxed. Other then that this game was bad. I wouldnt pay more then $5.00 for this poorly made game.
Metascore
58

Mixed or average reviews - based on 18 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 18
  2. Negative: 4 out of 18
  1. PC Format
    73
    Conflict: Denied Ops goes through the motions of first-person-shootage well, but ultimately feels mechanical and outdated. [Mar 2008, p.102]
  2. If you're a fan of Conflict and/or shooters in general, you're likely to find Denied Ops shallow and dull. The two-man control system doesn't work properly. The visuals are ugly. The script is sub-Armageddon. Yes, it's easy to pick up and play. But if you're after an experience with real challenge and depth, you won't want to.
  3. PC Gamer UK
    67
    Surprisingly competent and fun. [Mar 2008, p.76]