User Score
9.1

Universal acclaim- based on 1847 Ratings

User score distribution:

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. AlB
    Mar 6, 2009
    4
    I think this game is way too hard.I join a server,pick my class and i would be running for about 10 seconds and i get shot.Theres no teamwork involved.The way i saw this was that everyone was just running around shooting eachother.Only buy this if you are amazing at first person shooters because i think you will be fighting alot of nerds.
  2. AnthonyCollins
    May 17, 2006
    1
    This is a great flop...nice graphics but the gameplay has been fucked over so hard that DoD 1.6 don't even bother with it. Thanks VALVe for killing the DoD community with this crap game that you guys never update. Maybe you'll invest more time into making crappy games like Red Orchestra to get more money and never update the solid games that actually have a fan-base. Goodjob, Valve.
  3. Jul 11, 2012
    1
    Outdated graphics, unbalanced classes and weapons, poor maps design, annoying community, lack of skilled admins. The essence of indolence and rapacity, just another source trashcan infested with aimbots, bugusers, campers and other scums. Avoid it.
  4. John
    Jul 8, 2006
    2
    It was pretty bad compared to all other WW2 games out there. CoD mulitplyer is far better than this. But come on Russians, Italians, Japanise, And The British were in the war too! Boring Game Types Make This Not Worth Playing Or The Money.
  5. EricO.
    Mar 24, 2006
    4
    Pretty bad game, none of the guns are portrayed correctly, too much recoil, runs much worse than CS or HL2, bad levels and all in all just not a fun game at all.
  6. IBT
    May 6, 2006
    2
    Total garbage compared to the original. The bazooka class is far too overpowered due to the fact that allies get a carbine as a secondary. Weapons were taken out, and currently, models look worse than before. Valve should of stuck with a direct port, cause I know I want my money back. Search for DODC or Day of Destruction.
  7. AngaR.
    Oct 3, 2008
    2
    Had the game for the last 3 days, take a arm and a leg to download, and realize that game is over rated. If you think this Day of Defeat is as good as CS, let me tell you it effectively isn't. Far from it. It is awkward to play, the pace is out of control and there's no dynamic. Nevermind the sound. When players are hit they look like a string puppet, that stand when pulled, Had the game for the last 3 days, take a arm and a leg to download, and realize that game is over rated. If you think this Day of Defeat is as good as CS, let me tell you it effectively isn't. Far from it. It is awkward to play, the pace is out of control and there's no dynamic. Nevermind the sound. When players are hit they look like a string puppet, that stand when pulled, it's a bit odd. I am disappointed, very disappointed. Will be happy to uninstall the game and get a refund. Collapse
  8. SamY.
    May 4, 2008
    3
    Great graphics and sound effects!! On the other hand, Poor hit boxes, gameplay, not enough stock maps, and poor developer engine used.
  9. simon
    Oct 8, 2009
    0
    Random and sudden spawning enemies, weak weapons, poor collision, failed game mechanics (no value to actually jumping in) and misguided intent. this is a poor ww2 game even compared to cheap mill shooters i have actually played through. aside from good graphics and nice sounds, this is a waste of time and money. not all that glitters is gold, and this cheap game proves that.
  10. Alex
    Mar 26, 2006
    2
    This game dissapoints me big time. This game is a sequel to Day of defeat. That is where the similarities stop. The guns dont work 90% of the time. Overall the game is amazingly beautiful, but horribly random and frustrating. gameplay should be the main focus of a game, and it seems the devs on this game either are complete noobs, or hate gameplay (lol?) save yourself the 20 bucks, play This game dissapoints me big time. This game is a sequel to Day of defeat. That is where the similarities stop. The guns dont work 90% of the time. Overall the game is amazingly beautiful, but horribly random and frustrating. gameplay should be the main focus of a game, and it seems the devs on this game either are complete noobs, or hate gameplay (lol?) save yourself the 20 bucks, play dod 1.3 or cs I wish I was able to get my money back :P I'm giving it a 2 simply because the game LOOKS amazing. Expand
  11. JoeK.
    May 12, 2006
    1
    GREAT GAME!
  12. BeefquimJ.
    Mar 8, 2007
    1
    This game is pretty bad. The guns are SO unrealistic, and shooting someone in the face with a BAR and having them kill me is lame.
  13. MikaelS.
    Jul 21, 2007
    3
    There's nothing to say about the visuals used, the Source engine is still looking great, especially with the new features updated lately. But that doesn't make up for the rather poor mechanism and lack of innovation in this game, it's probably just as frustrating as the first game first found as a mod for the original Half-Life.
  14. TurdBurglar
    Jul 5, 2008
    2
    Graphics were good but game-play is less then stellar. I don't understand why you only get iron sights for only one class per team.... Either give every weapon iron sights or none of them. The original is far better despite its outdated visuals.
  15. LinkSL.
    Mar 30, 2006
    0
    Worst game ever made just check out the status page there are more people play the old game then this new one.
  16. JL
    Apr 1, 2006
    0
    haha....way to funny... How much do people have to spend the money to play this game? like $99999 right? WTF is wrong with this game? horrible fps declined... don't buy this game...sucks, horrible... it's just same as CS:S only characters and vehicle stuffs are added... As usual, Valve don't really put some efforts into the games...
  17. GregHanson
    Jun 11, 2006
    3
    The original was free - This isnt

    The originals maps never got tiring - This does

    The original game was fast - This isnt

    The original game had lots and lots of clans and leagues - This doesnt

    Quite simply put, Valve took everything that made the original great, and chucked them in the bin. I dont like this. I dont like this one bit.
  18. D.D.
    Jun 27, 2006
    0
    Apmped IGO obviously hasn't played many games. The 'crackle of machine gun fire' and 'hearing bullets wiz past your head' is a feature included in the greater majority of WW2 games, including Call of Duty, which came out before DOD Source.
  19. EliasO.
    Jul 14, 2006
    2
    Complete pile of trash... Man did I waste my money! Clearly those that say this is the "most realistic ww2 game ever" havent played Red Orchestra.. The DoD Original was so much better than this game, everything was perfectly balanced, now it's all unbalanced and everyone is running around bunny hopping and shooting like crazy.
  20. JensB.
    Mar 16, 2007
    4
    As a dod veteran, I must say the game was a particular flop. If it weren't for the source engine this game wouldn't last long. I would have definitely perferred if valve had left everything as it was and just changed the engine just for eye candy.
  21. JamesB.
    Aug 19, 2007
    2
    This game has some taste but its not all that great, i'll have to give some credit for making this game compatible with the source engine, which is a good thing. This game needs more stuff, like many weapons are left out of the game, take Red Orchestra for example, it has alot of different versions of a smg, but in DOD, it just gives a Tommy or a mp40, sure this game have some This game has some taste but its not all that great, i'll have to give some credit for making this game compatible with the source engine, which is a good thing. This game needs more stuff, like many weapons are left out of the game, take Red Orchestra for example, it has alot of different versions of a smg, but in DOD, it just gives a Tommy or a mp40, sure this game have some bazookas, but it still lacks the fun of using multiweapons. If you really want to find a good WWII shooter go buy the Call of Duty series, hell of a good WWII shooter, DOD on the other hand limited the battlefield of europe, where are the Brits? or Italians perhaps. My point is it needed more time in the process of making and probably a few more guns. Expand
  22. JohnV.
    Aug 7, 2007
    2
    This game is..horrible to say the least. The Source Engine should be used better and not for another WWII shooter. You people say you need to use "Teamwork". Well yes if every person who plays it is really stupid or are 8 year olds. The guns effects and damage are STILL bugged. Plus the game left out many WWII weapons (Sten Mk.II, Bren LMG, Grease Gun, and others). Again the "Teamwork" This game is..horrible to say the least. The Source Engine should be used better and not for another WWII shooter. You people say you need to use "Teamwork". Well yes if every person who plays it is really stupid or are 8 year olds. The guns effects and damage are STILL bugged. Plus the game left out many WWII weapons (Sten Mk.II, Bren LMG, Grease Gun, and others). Again the "Teamwork" element is gone when everyone runs madly at each other guns blazing. Maps are limited to about 6... COME ON PEOPLE. Want a good game? Buy Counter Strike: Source, it's fun, balanced, and everyone isn't an idiot. Visual are the only good thing about this game. Even the ragdolls are buggy. Please take my advice...I beg you DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY. CS:S is a much better game and it's a hell of a lot more fun. Expand
  23. Denis
    Jun 19, 2006
    4
    Sucks!!, wish I could get my money back. Can't seem to control the weapons, hard to get a proper aim, seems to always have an annoying lag, and generally, leaves me completely frustrated!! I'm glad I have good old DOD to fall back on. At least I can do okay on that game.
  24. vavilnono
    Jun 29, 2006
    2
    Low fps for not so cool effects, bugs ported from dod to the source version, lag like you were playing doom III on a P75, steam is the worst client ever ! (lots of RAM / poor download rate / IM down for a year / favorite server list reinitialize by itself ... ) RUN AWAY
  25. tonydoe
    Jul 18, 2006
    0
    man this sucks i cant even play the game cuz it just doesnt want to work. every time i press play DOD a pop says "unable to read library steam.dll". i mean whats up what that i payed 20 dollars and it doesnt work? valve are worst game producers and im not buying another one of their games again cuz it'll will not let me play!!!!!!!!!!!!1
  26. OscarR.
    Jan 17, 2007
    0
    This game is horrible, use source motor but the graphics. The sight of all the arms cannot be used, the way to act of the weapon when shooting is terrible
  27. FaceFace
    Mar 24, 2007
    3
    Disaster, the gun damages are all screwy compared to original dod, they cut out the British and a lot of the weapons and no dod_charlie? And the hand model skins are awful. The 3 is only because the maps are extremely pretty.
  28. [anonymous]
    Dec 30, 2009
    0
    This game is the worst WWII game ever! Its not realistic at all. Some of the people who rated this 5 or up should try Red Orchestra! Red Orchestra is basically a simulation game. Its graphics are great and it has good, realistic gameplay. The only problem is the NPCs are kind-of messed up. But I do not recommend DoD:S at all. Crappy graphics AND gameplay.
  29. Jun 4, 2011
    2
    This game is horrible, unlike what everyone says under me, the graphics do not fit the time at all, the weapons do not handle like the should (aka the STG44). All people do in this game is camp in corners, so it is the exact same thing as CoD2. The load times for custom maps is horrible, if you are lucky enough to get in fast enough you'll be able to grab a unique class (such as MG gunnerThis game is horrible, unlike what everyone says under me, the graphics do not fit the time at all, the weapons do not handle like the should (aka the STG44). All people do in this game is camp in corners, so it is the exact same thing as CoD2. The load times for custom maps is horrible, if you are lucky enough to get in fast enough you'll be able to grab a unique class (such as MG gunner or sniper which the max amount of players is always 1 or 2) not worth more than 5 dollars at most, spend your money on a real WWII experience, like Red Orchestra. A million times better Expand
  30. AnonymousMC
    Sep 4, 2009
    0
    This game takes every I liked about the original and rips it all out. Instead of a tense, methodical WW2 game with balanced weapons, it's just a run and gun shooter where players move inhumanly fast and shoot bazookas like the rocket launchers in quake. Worth some fun, but it gets a zero in my book for ruining such a fun, unique game.
  31. AnonymousMC
    Aug 15, 2007
    1
    This game is terrible. VALVe has more or less abandoned it. There has been no new content in a long time; it's ridiculous waiting years after a game has been released for additional content. The original was much better. Even if VALVe say that this adaptation had its own intentions rather than to replicate the original, it's no excuse for the poor design, bugged gameplay andThis game is terrible. VALVe has more or less abandoned it. There has been no new content in a long time; it's ridiculous waiting years after a game has been released for additional content. The original was much better. Even if VALVe say that this adaptation had its own intentions rather than to replicate the original, it's no excuse for the poor design, bugged gameplay and general unhappiness which is spawned from playing Day of Defeat: Source. This game isn't bad for the casual gamer, however, if you've played any - real - games for this genre, like Call of Duty. You'll know that this is just another way for VALVe to make a quick profit on the back of an extremely popular franchise. Expand
  32. Mar 12, 2014
    0
    God, what a terrible game. I hate almost everything about this game. Let's get started. First, the weapons are insanely unbalanced. The MG is literally a god weapon. You go prone, then you just kill everything. The bullet literally stays straight on it's path, and kills in 1 hit unless your terribly unlucky. It's basically a rapid fire sniper with no scope. Another problem with this map isGod, what a terrible game. I hate almost everything about this game. Let's get started. First, the weapons are insanely unbalanced. The MG is literally a god weapon. You go prone, then you just kill everything. The bullet literally stays straight on it's path, and kills in 1 hit unless your terribly unlucky. It's basically a rapid fire sniper with no scope. Another problem with this map is vantage points. Every weapon in this game(For the special classes like bazooka, MG, Sniper) is terribly overpowered in the range department, so if one team gets the classes in a vantage point, you basically have the game. The other team has fun trying desperately to move from cover to cover while the mg rips through their team, killing a person every second. The snipers and killing no matter where they hit, and the bazooka is blowing up clumps of guys hanging back because it's accurate to like 125m. The other classes are basically the same with 2 minor stat changes. There's not "teamwork" here. It's one team slaughtering the other team, but nobody helps each other out. The MG's set up camp and just rip through the entire enemy army, the snipers dodging and weaving the desperate shots of the people stuck playing normal class as they get destroyed by the snipers, the bazooka smoking out groups of 3 guys then pulling out his secondary which does way too much damage and blasts them away from the safety of his building.
    This game never ends fair. Within 3 mins one team is always on top, and it stays like that the whole game, mainly because of how utterly godlike your team becomes after you get the vantage point.
    Expand
Metascore
80

Generally favorable reviews - based on 22 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 22
  2. Negative: 0 out of 22
  1. 84
    I expect to be playing DoD a lot more than "Couterstrike: Source"... I recommend DoD:S to the multiplayer action crowd, but don't come crying to me when things start getting stale.
  2. 85
    While the game still needs some patching, and is unfortunately not DoD as we know it, this is still an absolutely fantastic package; those after a new multiplayer shooter can’t really go wrong with this one. Oh, and expect this score to go up over time as Valve patches out various problems.
  3. While a lack of maps cuts into the game's value somewhat, Day of Defeat: Source still offers a satisfying and exciting experience for those who just can't get enough of World War II.