User Score
8.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1279 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. Sep 5, 2013
    4
    It's possible that this was playable several years ago, but in 2013, it's useless. There are only six populated servers available, with the closest one being for custom sniper maps only and having a ping of 150, while the other servers have pings ranging from 240 to 300 and higher.
  2. StewartP.
    May 10, 2006
    3
    The glitches that remained unresolved; slow loading maps, unfixed kicks out of the game, poor animation make a a great 1990's game - the game has a nice gritty feel and is OK to play but the frustration it produces just trying to get online to play it (and to stay online) aren't really worth the effort. Had it been tested more thuroughly and put out first as a demo I The glitches that remained unresolved; slow loading maps, unfixed kicks out of the game, poor animation make a a great 1990's game - the game has a nice gritty feel and is OK to play but the frustration it produces just trying to get online to play it (and to stay online) aren't really worth the effort. Had it been tested more thuroughly and put out first as a demo I wouldn't have purchased it. This game in itself has make me very apprehensive about purchasing any games from STEAM without first being able to try a demo. Expand
  3. MTatonka
    Apr 8, 2006
    0
    I have to agree, this game is horrid. What are you other people looking at? Weapons behave like an out of control firehose, player moves (from first person) with no fluid action. Your stance changes and you have to reset your iron site every time. There has to be some intuitive design to the player, i.e. reload your weapon when its empty or re-chamber a round after you have taken a shot.I have to agree, this game is horrid. What are you other people looking at? Weapons behave like an out of control firehose, player moves (from first person) with no fluid action. Your stance changes and you have to reset your iron site every time. There has to be some intuitive design to the player, i.e. reload your weapon when its empty or re-chamber a round after you have taken a shot. The sound is deplorable, you cannot differeniate where a shot is coming from or where someone is walking or running.
    The maps are nice and the I enjoy the teamwork necessary to complete the objectives.
    Go back to the drawing board with that and make it better.
    Expand
  4. GregB.
    Aug 3, 2006
    0
    This game sucked, the only fun thing about it was killing team mates. Tanks are totally outranked as the nazis are nearly impossible to destroy, and every time someone wins a battle you have to wait forever for the new round to load.
  5. LPoolboy
    Aug 4, 2006
    3
    I tried this game for the free trial, and boy am I glad I did, if I was to sum up this game in 3 words they would be: 'Dark', 'Laggy', 'Boring'. The enthustiasts of this game will try tot ell you that by 'Dark' I actually mean 'Gritty, atmospheric, WW2-Esque', no, I mean dark, I honestly couldn't see a thing, enemy's are I tried this game for the free trial, and boy am I glad I did, if I was to sum up this game in 3 words they would be: 'Dark', 'Laggy', 'Boring'. The enthustiasts of this game will try tot ell you that by 'Dark' I actually mean 'Gritty, atmospheric, WW2-Esque', no, I mean dark, I honestly couldn't see a thing, enemy's are constantly ot of reach and everybody wears the exact same uniform, so you can never be sure if you have spotted an enemy or not. They'll tell you that the game does not lag and that I must have a poor connection. I am running a 10mb download conn and I have a pretty good pc, the load times are horrendous and the graphics are so poor yet it still lagged. They'll try to say that when I say it's 'boring' I am being unsophisticated and very uncouth, but I am not, the maps are badly designed. There's nothing wrong with them being so big but you should always have something to do, some sort of challenge, I don't consider travelling for minutes on foot then dying at the end and having to do it all over again. As I said you ahrdly ever see the enemy. The guns are clunky and slow, you don't ever feel in control, the models lack any dexterity. The keys are mapped poorly, the class sytem is done poorly, hell even the sound is average at best. For me this game seems to be one which will have a very strong tight knit community but it will also be very small and very hardcore. A bit like the online community of Swat 3 or other cult games. I would steer well clear, the learning curve is extremely steep and you never feel dangerous ingame due to the stupidly high recoil of the guns and the fact that you can never see the enemy. Poor effort, poor game. Expand
  6. Van
    Aug 4, 2006
    0
    This game is more than likely the absolute worst FPS game played in recent history. It's glitchy, your character moves extremely slow no matter what, the graphics are only a little better than DOD 1.6, Terrible sound quality, Whacky physics, Way too much recoil, It feels like it takes you 5 minutes to reload, maps and models are aweful and it's just plain boring. I'm glad I This game is more than likely the absolute worst FPS game played in recent history. It's glitchy, your character moves extremely slow no matter what, the graphics are only a little better than DOD 1.6, Terrible sound quality, Whacky physics, Way too much recoil, It feels like it takes you 5 minutes to reload, maps and models are aweful and it's just plain boring. I'm glad I never wasted any money on this game but I really, really regret downloading it for free. If you were into E.T. for the atari then this game is right up your ally. Honestly, i'm embarrassed for the developers of this slow paced drooling. Expand
  7. JerryB.
    Aug 7, 2006
    0
    problem #1- It takes way to long to connect to servers. problem #2- There are no crosshairs so you can't aim what your shooting at. problem # 3- Game play in general SUCKS !!!!!!!
  8. RadoslawCzyzewski
    Sep 9, 2006
    1
    W porownaniu z Day of Defeat (nawet starym) wypada blado. Gra jest pozbawiona akcji i realizmu (rozwalanie jednym strza?em czo?gu Tiger z 2km - jakim? ruskim szrotem... smiechu warte). Pozatym jak za t? cen? spodziewa?em si? czego? wi?cej jak tylko multiplayer... no i engine Unreala... pozostawia wiele do ?yczenia. Ta gra powinna kosztowa? najwy?ej 10$.
  9. RekitR.
    Jan 12, 2007
    3
    The game has its merits, but is really lacking. It does not even begin to use the game engine anywhere near its capability. Brings nothing new to gaming, not original, not basic either.
  10. christian
    Jan 3, 2007
    0
    grad gekauft, installiert, ne stunde auf steam gewartet um updates zu ziehen und letztendlich festgestellt dass es mit abstand das dümmste spiel is was ich seit langen gekauft hab. wer behauptungen aufstell es sei eine gekonnte mischung aus battlefield 42 und sonst irgendwas, merkt ihrs noch
    is nicht im ansatz mit dem niveau von battlefield 42 zu vergleichen obwohl battlefield 42 um
    grad gekauft, installiert, ne stunde auf steam gewartet um updates zu ziehen und letztendlich festgestellt dass es mit abstand das dümmste spiel is was ich seit langen gekauft hab. wer behauptungen aufstell es sei eine gekonnte mischung aus battlefield 42 und sonst irgendwas, merkt ihrs noch
    is nicht im ansatz mit dem niveau von battlefield 42 zu vergleichen obwohl battlefield 42 um jahre älter ist, nee so ne scheiße, wenn ich nicht battlefield 2 hätte würd ich lieber battlfield 42 spielen als den dreck
    Expand
  11. RobC.
    Jun 3, 2007
    3
    Nice. An attempted effort. Good graphics, extremely discouraging gameplay, players must travel several kilometres before the are in a gunfight with an opponent. OVERALL: IT SUCKS Get BF1942/DoD/CoD instead, much better, or any other WW2 video game but not this one!!!
  12. FAISALM
    Jan 1, 2009
    3
    Its so bad it didnt play it more than 4 times.
  13. Annoyed
    Apr 18, 2006
    0
    Only five critics bothered to rate this game, and none of them rated it higher than 85. Also, the metascore is 80, not 81, as Steam claims. As for the game itself, what's the point? Save your money for some other, better prepared game.
  14. AnonymousMC
    May 24, 2006
    0
    People who believe this is realistic warfare obviously have not been in war. If you want that sort of game ditch the mouse and keyboard and get yourself conscripted. For those of you who like war with a mouse and keyboard, dont bother with this, an overengineered slow action lacking debacle
  15. ManV.
    May 7, 2006
    3
    Oh...My...God... these were the words that came out of my mouth when I first saw the game ads all over steam. I was astonished, only by the idea of a modern game that gave you the opportunity to play as a soldier in the WW2 eastern front...Oh...My...God were the words that came out of my mouth when I first played the game...but it was NOT for a good reason... First of all: The game is Oh...My...God... these were the words that came out of my mouth when I first saw the game ads all over steam. I was astonished, only by the idea of a modern game that gave you the opportunity to play as a soldier in the WW2 eastern front...Oh...My...God were the words that came out of my mouth when I first played the game...but it was NOT for a good reason... First of all: The game is slow,really slow (I even had to reduce the graphics' detail levels and resolution but no improvement). The graphics did not annoy me, but they surely were not modern-day graphics. The animation was tragic,unrealistic...almost robotic. The sound was OK. These aspects, I could easily cope with. IF!!! If the gameplay produced what every gameplay's target is...FUN. This game is surely not fun... I was sooooo dissappointed. The interface is unreasonably complicated (even if I reallocated the keys,I was still confused) There are literally 1000 commands out there, you have to familiarize with. I agree with the absense of live map, i agree with the amount of damage caused by a shot... but i totally disagree with the absense of crosshair...now, you can call me noob and underskilled, but if there was any fun in fighting with my own self, just to put an enemy in my ironsights, believe me, I would sit down and eat my keyboard to learn how to do it properly...but...there is no joy in it...no fun...the point of a game is this. FUN. If I wanted to live a totally real warfare, I would enlist myself in an army to go to a front in real life.Now,there is another thing.Maybe less importand...some of the maps are huge to walk around...it doesn't help at all. Don't get me wrong...I was eagerly anticipating this game to come out and I pre-ordered it as soon as it came out as an ad and this is the reason I am furstrated...I personally find it promising,as an idea but...unplayable. Do something for us underskilled noobs who want to play as digital soldiers in the eastern front.... Expand
  16. Sgt.Rockski
    May 7, 2006
    3
    Game is using an old engine that is clunky. In steam, this game was 25 bucks, promised a lot and delievered a lot of crashing. I run a fairly state of the art system and this game still fails. The forums on steam are filled with complaints from users, I practically don't even play this anymore because they are not fixing teh bugs in it and teh game is a drag when it is rebooting or Game is using an old engine that is clunky. In steam, this game was 25 bucks, promised a lot and delievered a lot of crashing. I run a fairly state of the art system and this game still fails. The forums on steam are filled with complaints from users, I practically don't even play this anymore because they are not fixing teh bugs in it and teh game is a drag when it is rebooting or crashing your system all the time. Thumbs down until they work it out. But something else is my advice, and researcxh this game through what the players are saying on teh steam forums about it. It is definitely not even close to an 8 rating. Expand
  17. Anacro
    Jun 29, 2006
    3
    The screenshots looked good but the game isn't very good if you compare it to Battlefield 2. The maps are poor, the gameplay isn't fun. It may well be trying to simulate vehicles, weapons and the feel of battle 100% etc but this is at a cost to the fun factor and yes you can have a game which tries to simulate things and still be fun but this game lacks it. The only good thing The screenshots looked good but the game isn't very good if you compare it to Battlefield 2. The maps are poor, the gameplay isn't fun. It may well be trying to simulate vehicles, weapons and the feel of battle 100% etc but this is at a cost to the fun factor and yes you can have a game which tries to simulate things and still be fun but this game lacks it. The only good thing about this game is you don't tend to get spawn killed as soon as you spawn. I've played Battlefield 2 for over 600 hours and still continue to play it, why? Battlefield 2 finds the middle ground between realism and fun, there are also personal goals in Battlefield 2 like medals/ribbons/badges/promotions which can take months to get and yet still fun. Red Orchestra I played for 2 hours of utter frustration, completly boring too. It staggers me some of the ratings other players have given Red Orchestra, I can obly assume they haven't played BF2. Expand
  18. MikeL.
    Jun 5, 2006
    1
    Cant say its a great game because its still loading, and loading, and loading, and verifying etc. Bought this as a non-online game, figuring it could do both and I would ignore the online half. Cant get to or find the single player mode, nor does the box indicate that this isnt a suitable game for the singles like myself. I just bought it and already am ready to throw in the garbage. Cant say its a great game because its still loading, and loading, and loading, and verifying etc. Bought this as a non-online game, figuring it could do both and I would ignore the online half. Cant get to or find the single player mode, nor does the box indicate that this isnt a suitable game for the singles like myself. I just bought it and already am ready to throw in the garbage. Better wording on the box and I would have never bought it. Expand
  19. AdrianC.
    Aug 11, 2006
    4
    The load time is of 5 minuts and is desesperable and in a online game that the server change the maps each 20 minuts shouldn't wait 5 minuts to charge each map.
  20. DexterP.
    Aug 3, 2006
    1
    Boring, too clitchy, long loading times, nothing new, poor movements, you have to be 'qualified' to use vehicles so you just get owned by everyone else who uses tanks, crap maps, terrible recoil even when in short bursts and lying down, worse than Day of defeat (yes really that bad), just another poor attempt to nock Call of Duty of the top of the ladder glossed up with Boring, too clitchy, long loading times, nothing new, poor movements, you have to be 'qualified' to use vehicles so you just get owned by everyone else who uses tanks, crap maps, terrible recoil even when in short bursts and lying down, worse than Day of defeat (yes really that bad), just another poor attempt to nock Call of Duty of the top of the ladder glossed up with supposively 'amazing graphics'. Bought it for £25 played it for a day sold it to a friend for a tenner the very next Expand
  21. AledM>
    Aug 5, 2006
    3
    Good visuals, poor game play, too many controls and way too complicated. A bad attempt at a good game idea!!
  22. JackH.
    Aug 6, 2006
    1
    As someone already related, most of the gaming community will sit and scratch their heads, wondering how to use unknown controls. Realism, schmealism. Give me a good FPS any day, and keep your 4-person tanks and anti-tank weapons that won't fire, no matter what you do. I hate to say it but this one rates a limburger.
  23. DragonsR.
    Sep 1, 2006
    3
    This game absolutley sucks!!. No manual included, no ID code and I stuck here d-loading something I don't want on my PC just to play it?? nope hell no it's going back where it came from!
  24. RobA.
    Feb 1, 2007
    2
    Boring and fantastical ballistics. Great game if that's all you do. Every server has one third of the players with high scores and everyone else is fodder. How many times can you stand running back from spawn? If you play this game my advice is to camp every time on every server...you might have a bit of fun.
  25. ZachB.
    Oct 20, 2008
    1
    I wouldnt recommend this game to anyone but those who have an extreme like of realistic WWII game play. The AI is horrible and unbalanced, while the graphics are pretty shoddy. Some of the maps have glitches such as tanks getting stuck and etc. Multiplayer is somewhat alright but bots are hideously bad on both teams while objectives often leave you wondering what you actually have to do I wouldnt recommend this game to anyone but those who have an extreme like of realistic WWII game play. The AI is horrible and unbalanced, while the graphics are pretty shoddy. Some of the maps have glitches such as tanks getting stuck and etc. Multiplayer is somewhat alright but bots are hideously bad on both teams while objectives often leave you wondering what you actually have to do to beat the game. At one point on a map involving capturing areas the game decided to glitch and make it impossible to capture the enemies points, yet even after they managed to capture our points we still won. Bottom line, the game feels like its in beta, and plays like its in alpha Expand
  26. PhilE.
    Jun 13, 2008
    2
    This game is too realistic for it's own good. I would strongly advise you think before buying. The concept is good, but I am disappointed at how hard the gameplay is, and how slow it is. I may be abandoning this game.
  27. GamerTrust
    Feb 10, 2009
    0
    worst game ever
    controls are terrible as compared to the popular games like counter strike source or Day of defeat source which is a much better wwii game. The game provides no crosshair or whatsoever and its wayy to slow paced, lack of sniper classes.
    0/10 only thing that was good about it was its maps.
  28. BrianS
    May 9, 2009
    2
    This game was total crap! All people do in this game is grab a PPsH, camp, and dominate. Thats all you need! Russians are seriously over powered and as said before, this game is nothing but a total camp fest.
  29. KenPrussing
    Oct 13, 2006
    0
    Total garbage. We have been unable to download the game from Steam even after numerous calls to them. There answer is Call Steam it is not our problem. Promises of return call backs have not happened. This is the worst game my son has ever purchased.
  30. danielpatten
    Nov 5, 2006
    1
    ive had the game for monthsand its still not updated enough to play, 24 hours to wait on download of update is retarded. i wish i could get my money back, never buy from this company again, looks cool. but so what if your unable to play in a reasonable amount of time, guess critics didnt have to download the piece of junk
  31. SergeyS.
    Dec 20, 2006
    4
    Wow, what a disappointment. I was so wrong thinking this was another Brothers in Arms. Single player mode, e.g. "Training" is awful: AI is dumber than my hamster, no realism whatsoever. Multiplayer mode is a bit better, but you have to get up pretty early to get a good weapon, otherwise you're stuck with a bolt-action rifle that is awkward to use at best. Damage mode is very Wow, what a disappointment. I was so wrong thinking this was another Brothers in Arms. Single player mode, e.g. "Training" is awful: AI is dumber than my hamster, no realism whatsoever. Multiplayer mode is a bit better, but you have to get up pretty early to get a good weapon, otherwise you're stuck with a bolt-action rifle that is awkward to use at best. Damage mode is very realistic, too realistic if you ask me: a hit in a leg slows down your movement, a hit an an arm - you can't use your weapon. But now the question is, how the heck are you supposed to heal if the game has no medics and there's a fortified machine gun nest in front??? Pointless. The only thing I REALLY enjoyed, though, is being a machine-gunner myself: those tracers and ricochets, and plumes of dust when you hit a cement wall are impressive. Expand
  32. gamer
    Oct 23, 2006
    1
    The lack of a good way to start playing leaves me in the dust. I had the game installed for over an hour and all that comes up on the screen is the Steam user account that i created over an hour ago. Will soon see after something gets downloading in which i have no idea what Steam is downloading.
  33. JA
    Oct 28, 2006
    0
    Gameplay is awful. The maps are too large. The bots are stupid. The "Iron sight mode", which was copied from other games, is ineffective. The scenery is plain and clearly little imagination was used in forming them. Tripwire should come up with something good, and stop this second-rate game.
  34. AdamM.
    Mar 25, 2006
    4
    This game was a step backward. DOD:S and CS:S are the benchmark and this fell well short.
  35. SunilH.
    Mar 25, 2006
    2
    Worst game evvver ... felt I was mislead by the promo vidio - bots and graphics are horrid.
  36. SerdarA.
    Mar 26, 2006
    0
    I pre-ordered this game thrusting steam would not put anything worthless in their system. This is by far the worst game I have ever played. It is a waste of time money and bandwidth. The movies and the screen shots looks great but that is not what you get in the game. Movement is slugish the graphics are based on the outdated Unreal engine (yes this is not a source engine game). And if I pre-ordered this game thrusting steam would not put anything worthless in their system. This is by far the worst game I have ever played. It is a waste of time money and bandwidth. The movies and the screen shots looks great but that is not what you get in the game. Movement is slugish the graphics are based on the outdated Unreal engine (yes this is not a source engine game). And if plan on playing a slodier you may forget that as well. the maps are huge and you "have to" drive something. and of course you are seeing everything from a 1x4 inch screen. The only people who will love this game are the snipers who like to camp in one position. I would have donated the money wasted on this game to a charity. at least it would have done some good. Now it is used by Tripwire to make more useless games... I w?ould have give -10 if I was given the option. Do not buy! Avoid like the plaque. Expand
  37. DavidB.
    Mar 31, 2006
    4
    Most of the ratings here are by the staff in order to promote the game they will probley remove this comment. honestly this game is alot like any other ww2 fps the graphics are bad and could be greatly improved. the game play is better then expected but still lacks in areas. I dont think its worth the money.
  38. IanB.
    Apr 15, 2006
    3
    I bought this game with great anticipation, only to be greatly let down. First off both Day of Defeat and Call of Duty are light years ahead of this game, even Operation Flashpoint I would say has it up on this game. The grapics are mediocre at best and the game is choppy even offline with normal settings. The interface is not as easy as most first person shooters, the grenades handle I bought this game with great anticipation, only to be greatly let down. First off both Day of Defeat and Call of Duty are light years ahead of this game, even Operation Flashpoint I would say has it up on this game. The grapics are mediocre at best and the game is choppy even offline with normal settings. The interface is not as easy as most first person shooters, the grenades handle poorly. The only thing that the game offers differently than the other shooters is sneaking element - in which I would then recommend Operation Flashpoint or better Battle Field:1942, over this game. In short, I will never buy a game off Steam without viewing a demo of it first. This game comparably sucks!!!! Expand
  39. JohnB.
    Apr 15, 2006
    2
    Compared to games of its caliber and goals, it falls short due to technical limitations. The idea of realism itself ends up become a shortcoming of the game, especially in the community, as it ends up being an excuse for certain gimmicks and gameplay features (or lack of them). I feel there was significant ambition, but too much for a game won out of a competition from a mod.
  40. MauryRhodes
    May 12, 2006
    0
    After 3 months of waiting to get the game running there is no one playing might as well go back to the mod and play.
  41. HankJ.
    May 15, 2006
    4
    Graphics are sub par, there are many other games out there, that do this genre' better than this one does.
  42. DeathSquad
    May 16, 2006
    1
    This game started off as a free mod for unreal tournament 2003. This only shows how greedy the creators are.
    In fact, you are paying $24.95 for a bloody modification. I wonder if Atari, Epic Games and Digital Extremes authorized this game to be sold on Steam. I mean, the engine, wich in fact was creaded by Digital Extremes and Atari, is with no doubt copyrighted.
    So, if you buy this
    This game started off as a free mod for unreal tournament 2003. This only shows how greedy the creators are.
    In fact, you are paying $24.95 for a bloody modification. I wonder if Atari, Epic Games and Digital Extremes authorized this game to be sold on Steam. I mean, the engine, wich in fact was creaded by Digital Extremes and Atari, is with no doubt copyrighted.

    So, if you buy this game, you are breaking the law, unless they are authorized to sell it.
    Expand
  43. AlexB.
    May 6, 2006
    3
    Poor, bad graphics, slow irritating unrealistic difficult gamepley. Wasted my money.
  44. AdamM.
    May 9, 2006
    0
    This game is not in anyway a special game. It's graphics go back to the days of Half-Life 1, or even pre-Half-Life! Before I go on, we must remember... IT IS THE YEAR 2006, NOT 1997! The AI sucks, big time, it is worse than James Bond: Goldeneye on N64. Combat is really fake. I would recommend getting the best WWII game (PERIOD), which is Day of Defeat: Source! This game was aThis game is not in anyway a special game. It's graphics go back to the days of Half-Life 1, or even pre-Half-Life! Before I go on, we must remember... IT IS THE YEAR 2006, NOT 1997! The AI sucks, big time, it is worse than James Bond: Goldeneye on N64. Combat is really fake. I would recommend getting the best WWII game (PERIOD), which is Day of Defeat: Source! This game was a waste of $30! The worst game I have ever played! Expand
  45. AnonymousMC
    Jun 18, 2006
    0
    Im still unable to play load times are really long I have to wait at least 15-20mins before i get to the server screen and another 20mins before it even deciedes to even show team select screen and about another 10mins before the map loads so don't waste you money.
  46. Kevweg
    Aug 12, 2006
    0
    Horrible game..The people who claim its realistic and close to the real thing are out to lunch..Throw a grenade in this game on the other side of 4 foot thick wall and the screen goes blank for 5 seconds..whatever...the whole thing is painfuly slow to load and then you will probably end up on a server with glitches and disconnects. the graphics are terrible and the movemnet is l;ike Horrible game..The people who claim its realistic and close to the real thing are out to lunch..Throw a grenade in this game on the other side of 4 foot thick wall and the screen goes blank for 5 seconds..whatever...the whole thing is painfuly slow to load and then you will probably end up on a server with glitches and disconnects. the graphics are terrible and the movemnet is l;ike something from 10 or 15 years ago..do not waste your money on this game...easily one of the worst first person shooter games ever..id give it lower then zero if i could. Expand
  47. JoshuaGrove
    Aug 2, 2006
    0
    Need a T1 line to download this game. I bought the game in circuit city. CD doesn't have the game on it. You have to download 2GB to get it with "steam". I've been trying to download it for 6hours with no luck. Its stuck at 69% and keeps saying servers to busy.
  48. NickR.
    Aug 2, 2006
    1
    What a sorry excuse for a game. Even if I could look past the sorry excuse for a graphics engine there is not a single original idea. I've never played a game that I couldnt give at least an hour to prove itself fun and entertaining till now.
  49. RegisJ.
    Aug 3, 2006
    0
    Right off teh bat the game was horrid, controls at default were a nightmare and graphics wise... ...i don't wanna bother explaining.
  50. RumpelStieltzchen
    Aug 5, 2006
    0
    Shred it! Is this a game from 1998,or what?Stupid actions,zones,Bots,and,and,and.... looks like a flashpoint-cover. Forget it! No point!
  51. GordonF.
    Jan 14, 2007
    0
    Ladies and gentleman, I think we may be on to the biggest conspiracy of our generation. Apparently, I somehow missed the hypnotism that would've convinced me this game isn't the biggest piece of crap since Shaq Fu. From my sober mind I could observe this game even failed at realism. Apparently, a single smoke grenade can shroud an entire city, that's very impressive. Also, Ladies and gentleman, I think we may be on to the biggest conspiracy of our generation. Apparently, I somehow missed the hypnotism that would've convinced me this game isn't the biggest piece of crap since Shaq Fu. From my sober mind I could observe this game even failed at realism. Apparently, a single smoke grenade can shroud an entire city, that's very impressive. Also, I now can sympathise with all the lag the army have had to put up with throughout history. Well, if I've learned anything from this game, its that too much realism causes a hole in my wall shaped like a computer moniter. I feel grateful to have not fallen under this game's evil spell. My prayers are with those who have been wooed by it. Expand
  52. HolmN.
    Feb 6, 2007
    4
    Good graphics very realistic, but very cumbersome to get a good server. Tank wars are dull. Not many people playing it looks, I gave this one up....
  53. Jens
    Apr 2, 2007
    3
    Don't buy this game if you are a serious gamer looking for a challenging and realistic game. It's neither realistic nor challenging. Instead of realism you have an extremely clumsy interface that takes control away from you and makes everyone equally bad. Except for the cheaters of course, which there are plenty of, since the game uses the flawed "VAC" anti-cheat system. I gave Don't buy this game if you are a serious gamer looking for a challenging and realistic game. It's neither realistic nor challenging. Instead of realism you have an extremely clumsy interface that takes control away from you and makes everyone equally bad. Except for the cheaters of course, which there are plenty of, since the game uses the flawed "VAC" anti-cheat system. I gave it 3 points for immersion and graphics (except for the animations, which are horrible). Expand
  54. NapoleonA.
    Jun 13, 2008
    1
    Well, It's awful game. I really expected more.
  55. RyanB.
    Jun 28, 2008
    2
    This game people rant and rave about, well i just bought it and I see nothing to rant about, Yes the tank wars are good but other then that the registry is "Terrible" I do not recommed buying this game if it is priced over $5 USD.
  56. MichaelsS.
    Sep 5, 2008
    0
    Horrible game, With Horrible Missions and Graphics. Worst 10$ spent on any software i ever spent.
  57. BN
    Mar 16, 2009
    2
    Unintuitive controls, a game trying to be to realistic, the way the game balances teams, basicly scramble of who ever can click on it first, usually leaves you stuck for choice making u fodder usually with a rifle, dont even give u a pistol! and then some idiot usually who runs off n dies alot or shoots you in the back with the nice powerfull gun... maybe they was wondering if it actually Unintuitive controls, a game trying to be to realistic, the way the game balances teams, basicly scramble of who ever can click on it first, usually leaves you stuck for choice making u fodder usually with a rifle, dont even give u a pistol! and then some idiot usually who runs off n dies alot or shoots you in the back with the nice powerfull gun... maybe they was wondering if it actually works seeings as they die so much n dont kill anything??? rotating class's would improve gameplay alot! It was on offer for 2.99 and i still feel like i wasted my money and should have gone n gotten icecream. Expand
  58. TravisS.
    Jun 25, 2009
    0
    This game just doesn't have what it takes to really make you feel in the war, crappy aiming, no support for new players like making it easier for people who are new, overall just crap, more experienced players just take advantage over new players because they can't aim with that shitty aim system.
  59. BrentS
    Dec 18, 2006
    3
    One would truly think a game this smelly would had to of been cobbled together in the confines of a Romanian cave and smuggled out to the consumer by Uzbekistanian Gypsies, via a drunken donkey caravan...not uploaded directly to your PC through "Day of Defeat" affiliated Steam. I mean wow condom less sex with a Bosnian hooker couldn
  60. Jeff
    Dec 7, 2006
    2
    This game was poorly designed from conception. First off, you designed a cheap game, setup a cheap site, and assumed that making a multiplayer environment would woo the crowds. Multiplayer games are successful because of their social aspect for one, and Red Orchestra does not do that any better than CS:DOD (competitor/alternative). Take a hint from CS, COD, Quake, etc. Build a single This game was poorly designed from conception. First off, you designed a cheap game, setup a cheap site, and assumed that making a multiplayer environment would woo the crowds. Multiplayer games are successful because of their social aspect for one, and Red Orchestra does not do that any better than CS:DOD (competitor/alternative). Take a hint from CS, COD, Quake, etc. Build a single player game first, then develop the multiplayer for those who couldn't get enough. I am sure that you are saying that since Unreal did it, so can you. This is true... On the same token, you have to acknowledge that Unreal is your competitor, and a strong one at that. Though your product is cheaper, I am more likely to pool my money into Unreal because it has a larger community and more servers with more people which equals more choices (which consumers like). I do have to applaud you on your tactic to get more people online with Red Orchestra in the hopes that they would buy the game (and to appease current owners who can't find people playing online.). I personally thought that it would be a ploy for a single player game that would put me all the way through 12 chapters in a 13 chapter series and that I'd have to buy it to finish the game (that could be a good strategy on the tail end of a games life...) Moving along... The graphics are worse than CS:Source, which is surprising with the Unreal engine. The play is slow b/c the maps are too big. Unreal successfully allowed players nonstop playing with nihl downtime when they got killed (nihl downtime and no hike to get back to the battle) The tanks cannon can only be moved with the keyboard. To get more fanfare I propose the following: (surprisingly) Create a singleplayer option. More action with less downtime. Use the graphics engine your paying to license and push Unreal to its limits. I felt like I was on a Commodore. Overall, if this was your first game, good for you. I'm sure you'll produce some quality things over the next years (hopefully Red October 2). Expand
  61. NovalG.
    Mar 31, 2006
    3
    This game is a complete failure: Its graphics are lousy, the game interface could be greatly improved, and the whole game, itself, does not work well. Although the game attempts to be realistic, it does not succed too well. I also noticed that the single-player mode honestly sucks: The bots have the intelligence equal to a bar of soap! I think that the designers should either remove the This game is a complete failure: Its graphics are lousy, the game interface could be greatly improved, and the whole game, itself, does not work well. Although the game attempts to be realistic, it does not succed too well. I also noticed that the single-player mode honestly sucks: The bots have the intelligence equal to a bar of soap! I think that the designers should either remove the single-player mode or improve the bots AI pathing. THe multiplayer, on the other hand is mediocre. The player bases is small and the bugs are very very dismall. The last time I played this wretched game, it was not unheard of for me to fall through the ground and get stuck in-between things. I have to honestly say, "This game has a great idea but it is lacking the required material in orde for it to be successful and decent!" Expand
  62. DanielC.
    Apr 19, 2006
    3
    This is not worth buying. I brought this on steam and it shows up along side of games such as counter strike : source and half life 2, my favorite games ever. This costs $25 so is already over-priced. It uses the ancient unreal engine which, if it had been replaced with hl2 engine would have made me give this game a 6-8 mark. The one good thing is the gameplay, the maps are brilliantly This is not worth buying. I brought this on steam and it shows up along side of games such as counter strike : source and half life 2, my favorite games ever. This costs $25 so is already over-priced. It uses the ancient unreal engine which, if it had been replaced with hl2 engine would have made me give this game a 6-8 mark. The one good thing is the gameplay, the maps are brilliantly designed and all elements of the game work smoothly apart from one or two glitches. But the soomthness is nothing compaired to the quality of grapihcs and movemnet (which I find weak in this game) compared to any hl2 bassed game. Save your money and go buy somthing else. This game does not deserve 80. Only recomended to WWII fans and realism junkies. Expand
  63. DeVoiD
    May 11, 2006
    3
    Well, it certainly "looked" like a great game, but allt he issues just to be able to play it!!! First the zonealarm issue, the work around.. dont have zonealarm startup (leaving you vunerable to attacks and spyware), then Steam (the delivery system for this game) has issues with the game and you have to have steam strat up in its own safe mode!!! The complete and total LACK OF SUPPORT by Well, it certainly "looked" like a great game, but allt he issues just to be able to play it!!! First the zonealarm issue, the work around.. dont have zonealarm startup (leaving you vunerable to attacks and spyware), then Steam (the delivery system for this game) has issues with the game and you have to have steam strat up in its own safe mode!!! The complete and total LACK OF SUPPORT by the company that made this game, leads me to score this VERY low. Im so dissatisfied with it, I have deleted its local content from my PC, and unfortunately, the EULA stats that you will not get your money back on anything bought through steam.... (maybe they should look at each state as its consumer law is different and I could potentiall go through small claims and probably be sucessfull, but why bother). BE WARNED if are thinking about buying this game, if you have zonealram or buy it through steam, you have a lot of work to do to get this game to work. If you have any questions, dont hold your breath for any help on their forums. This could have been a good game, but lets face it, this was made as a MOD and was produced by people who won the "build something unreal" contest...... so its not like it was built by people who are in the industry, just a collection of people whose skill at programming, graphics, etc is just not up to par. D. Expand
  64. HemaT.
    May 11, 2006
    1
    I think that some people are playing a different game than me. Well my version of RO is the worst game steam has in their library. The game is slow, built on an engine from a '72 Pinto, and not fun at all. If this game is realistic, then WWII had a lot confused soldiers in a laggy war. Simply, a crap game.
  65. TYP.
    May 14, 2006
    3
    Poor Graphics, Poor Gameplay, and after several weeks of trying to get the game to work after it began crashing when trying to select "Multiplayer", I have deleted it from my hard drive. Just because Valve is selling it on Steam, doesn't mean it's any good, and they (Valve) will do nothing to helkp unless it's a Steam issue. I'm learning to beware any "third party developers".
  66. BobK.
    Jul 25, 2006
    1
    Just bought it .What a piece of crap & a waste of money.All servers seem empty I wonder why.Dont waste your money on this one.I wish I could get my money back.
  67. TonyC.
    Jul 26, 2006
    4
    Too buggy, poor support, and support forums used to abuse.
  68. TomPurcell
    Sep 24, 2006
    2
    I gave it a 2 because after paying for it, I've played it twice. The second time just to see if I missed anything. Very dull game. A few nice aspects but poorly executed. If they would improve the character animation I'll give it a third try. Good concepts but when people look like robots when they run, it is a big turn off. Cheers.
  69. FelixP-Crighton
    Dec 30, 2007
    1
    I played this game for 10 minutes before getting bored... the gameplay may be realistic, but the lack of crosshairs (including the fact that the crosshair wouldn't stay in the middle of the screen) ruins this game entirely... the controls are annoying and difficult to use... you have to walk (or drive) for an hour before you even start to engage in combat.. you dont have a radarI played this game for 10 minutes before getting bored... the gameplay may be realistic, but the lack of crosshairs (including the fact that the crosshair wouldn't stay in the middle of the screen) ruins this game entirely... the controls are annoying and difficult to use... you have to walk (or drive) for an hour before you even start to engage in combat.. you dont have a radar either... this is one of the worst games i've ever played... doesnt deserve a solid 10. If you want a FUN fps experience play either cs:s, dod:s or tf2. the only reason this game gets a 1 is because the graphics are ok Expand
  70. STEVEB.
    Oct 18, 2008
    2
    Dont waste your time or money. If you want a realistic simulation with better graphics and gameplay, sans the tanks, try Insurgency. Its free! Im kinda peeved that I wasted even 5 bucks on this game. Graphics are plain Jane, AI is terrible. the game is not smooth moving at all, even with good specs, and its hard to even place your iron sight accurately. even with mouse smoothing maxed. Dont waste your time or money. If you want a realistic simulation with better graphics and gameplay, sans the tanks, try Insurgency. Its free! Im kinda peeved that I wasted even 5 bucks on this game. Graphics are plain Jane, AI is terrible. the game is not smooth moving at all, even with good specs, and its hard to even place your iron sight accurately. even with mouse smoothing maxed. Just goes to show, dont buy a game unless you can check out a demo! theres a reason this one does not have 1, cause it stinks. Expand
  71. HarryB
    Aug 19, 2008
    2
    For me, it completely fails to surpass the likes of COD 4. Having never taken part in WWII, I can't judge the game on it's realism. But I'm assuming "reallism" means the game's agonizingly slow and unforgiving nature, which it is, but for a game these are not qualties for enjoyment. The controls are unwieldly, the time it takes to aim down the iron sights is painful andFor me, it completely fails to surpass the likes of COD 4. Having never taken part in WWII, I can't judge the game on it's realism. But I'm assuming "reallism" means the game's agonizingly slow and unforgiving nature, which it is, but for a game these are not qualties for enjoyment. The controls are unwieldly, the time it takes to aim down the iron sights is painful and the best tactic is to camp in a good spot. Realistic or not I don't like it Expand
  72. GrahamW
    Oct 25, 2009
    0
    Could not find the point of this game. Nothing to shoot at. Weapons refuse to fire. Random explosions that come out of nowhere Complete waste of money.
  73. Daniel
    Jul 24, 2009
    1
    If you don't play this game since months or years you won't have a chance to survive...not even 3 minutes. There are so many positions (and also BUG positions you can't even know them if you don't play in a pro clan). The aiming looks very cool but just for a short time. Bugs are included like holes in a piece of cheese. My advice: If you love clan playing= play If you don't play this game since months or years you won't have a chance to survive...not even 3 minutes. There are so many positions (and also BUG positions you can't even know them if you don't play in a pro clan). The aiming looks very cool but just for a short time. Bugs are included like holes in a piece of cheese. My advice: If you love clan playing= play it...you can learn how to have fun in this game. But if you just want a WW2 game for fun=STOP. Expand
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 22 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 22
  2. Negative: 1 out of 22
  1. I absolutely love the attention Tripwire has given to the small details in the game.
  2. 85
    There's very little gameyness in RO and a whole lot of gritty crawling along the ground so you can flank over to that machine gunner and allow your team to advance to the next spawn point objective.
  3. Red Orchestra is an enjoyable, team-based online shooter for those who like the Battlefield-style games but want a more technical and realistic experience.