Metascore
61 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 19 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 19
  2. Negative: 4 out of 19
  1. This title uses may of the tired conventions of the fighting genre but manages to keep them interesting with great graphics, clean gameplay, and the potential to cause a lot of damage to a lot of people. [Feb 2004, p.112]
  2. It's the careful blending of two closely-related genres that seems to work quite well. Unfortunately the game isn't polished enough overall which may be a deterrent to some gamers.
  3. Offers a great and versatile combo system, interactive environments, and an overall refreshing take on fighting games. However, the controls are pretty cumbersome, and can lead to unnecessary frustration.
  4. The game would have been better if the robots had back attacks or other, better options to prevent enemies from getting behind them. Regardless, there certainly isn't anything else out there that's quite like it, so fans of other fighting games should give it a look.
  5. A little late, but still a good game. But, it's not a game where you must rush out to go buy it now. Unfortunately, it doesn't compare to the games that are out these days.
  6. For those of us with excess patience, though, the rewards could be great. Battlegrounds looks fantastic and sports a startling degree of replayable fun. Best of all, in establishing a wide beta tester program early on, Diversions Entertainment set the groundwork for a fanatically loyal player base that will be the key to success in the long run.
  7. 67
    It obviously didn't have the budget that it should have as is evidenced by the less than glorious design elements and production values. I've never seen a fighter with such boring menu systems and loading screens.
  8. Has extreme potential to become a hugely admired multiplayer game. But, before that happens the lads at Diversions Entertainment may have to cough up a huge consignment of patches to tweak the many issues we observed throughout gameplay.
  9. The controls are fairly well created however the game moves at a slow pace and unless you have mastered the combos before the match your robot will be laying on his back most of the game.
  10. 60
    The perspective is wrong, making combat a chore, and playing against other people is a nightmare. Even if you can ignore these faults, it succumbs to another deadly sacrament that affects even the best fighting game: it's repetitive to the point of exhaustion.
  11. Control is one of the most important things to truly let you connect with a game. With OMF I was unable to establish this connection and the game just didn’t really entertain me or draw me in. Fighting, the main thrust of the game, was often a chore.
  12. Going online will pit you against some opponents that are much more fun to play, but the problems with the clunky controls are never alleviated.
  13. 60
    The idea of bringing fighting into three-dimensional arenas with freedom of movement is excellent, but bigger, multi-floored arenas with more weapon pickups would’ve added more variety and eliminated repetitivity from the simple, round arenas.
  14. The online option has potential, but fighting human opponents doesn't improve the core gameplay, which hasn't evolved since I was talking all that college smack 10 years ago. [Mar 2004, p.74]
  15. The experience with different human players gives it an edge, but the edge is much needed to counterbalance the lack of moves and environmental interaction. This provides fun but superficial gameplay that succeeds in small doses.
  16. 40
    Once you get used to the quirky, low-budget sensibility One Must Fall: Battlegrounds is a decent fighter, especially for online play. But the random crashes really put a damper on the fun.
  17. A pretty limited fighter, though its online features save it from beingi a complete loss. [Apr 2004, p.83]
  18. Although it's an admirable attempt, in a world with games like "Soul Calibur 2," ambition isn't enough. [May 2004, p.62]
  19. The concept behind OMF: Battlegrouds is solid and the gang at Diversions deserves credit for at least attempting to correct the PC's astonishing lacl of fighting games, but that doesn't make it a good game. Remotely.
User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 15 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 9
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 9
  3. Negative: 2 out of 9
  1. JuliánR.
    10
    This game is very good.
  2. Eyewitness
    9
    Jesus guys you should'nt rate a game after 5 minutes.... Overall it is good but the "strength" of the enemies are determined in a very strange way... I personally liked it... but if you didnt that only means you cant play it right enough... try an fps instead of ranting at the game in forums... Full Review »
  3. Ithon
    10
    OMF:BG is a very good game, you just have get used to the controls and the lack of blood. Which blood in games now is like crack cocane for for heavy users. You don't need blood to have a good game, which could be the reason that thier have been 0s and 10s so far and not rating in between. Full Review »