Metascore
72

Mixed or average reviews - based on 31 Critics What's this?

User Score
7.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 74 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: On the war-torn planets of tomorrow, mankind's greatest battle is about to begin. With its frontier colonies devastated by a growing insurrection, Earth dispatches the elite 8th Armored Infantry (nicknamed "Section 8") to repel the coming onslaught. The nickname refers to an old UnitedOn the war-torn planets of tomorrow, mankind's greatest battle is about to begin. With its frontier colonies devastated by a growing insurrection, Earth dispatches the elite 8th Armored Infantry (nicknamed "Section 8") to repel the coming onslaught. The nickname refers to an old United States military regulation where a soldier would be dismissed from service through being mentally unfit for duty. The near-suicidal missions that this division volunteers for brands them as insane by other military units. Section 8 deploys by 'burning in' from their orbital drop ships tens of thousands of feet above the battlefield, utilizing the most advanced arsenal of military hardware known to man. Their mission: to scout and secure difficult objectives and smash enemy defenses in lightning-quick assaults. An intense first-person shooter, Section 8 allows players to dynamically alter the flow of combat as they see fit. Employing tactical assets and on-demand vehicle deliveries, players are given unprecedented strategic control over epic sci-fi battlefields. [SouthPeak Interactive] Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 31
  2. Negative: 1 out of 31
  1. Satisfying combat and interesting mission structure saves this from the yawns of a thousand identikit space marines. [Nov 2009, p.102]
  2. 80
    If you're willing to put in some time to learn the game's systems and are eager to work as part of a team, then it's easy to have a good time with this one.
  3. Section 8 is capable of scintillating multiplayer drama, and it is impeccably solid throughout. I've had some maginficent tooth-and-nail matches, which is all I can really ask for. For all the offbeat design decisions and mechanistic foibles, I've been enjoying the hell out of it.
  4. This game is almost strictly a multiplayer experience. As such, you're not getting a whole lot of value for your money. That said, the competitive online play will be worth the price of admission for many.
  5. A fun objective-focused shooter with a good premise and ideas, but less satisfying core combat. [Issue#25, p.46]
  6. It is good game, not a great game; fortunately the sum of its parts don't equal the end product. If you can get by the remedial graphics and sound, you could have some hardcore gaming in store.
  7. Ultra-generic. [Dec 2009, p.99]

See all 31 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 26
  2. Negative: 5 out of 26
  1. Tex
    Nov 3, 2009
    10
    No, it's not Tribes or Tribes 2. It's not even Tribes Vengeance *thank god*. What it is however, is the first good FPS+Z produced No, it's not Tribes or Tribes 2. It's not even Tribes Vengeance *thank god*. What it is however, is the first good FPS+Z produced by an industry plagued with mediocrity. Section 8 offers several innovative ideas, coupled with some old familiar mechanics that make this industry spin. The only negative thing I can say about this game is that so few seem to play online. Since this game's primary function is fulfilled online, that's a bit of a problem. However, I have never been unable to play, there's always a few populated servers up. If you were a fan of the Tribes franchise then I would recommend this. For the people that want a quick kill game, I suggest looking elsewhere, Section 8 will be attractive to the hardcores only. Expand
  2. JonB
    Oct 28, 2009
    9
    As others have said: This is a multiplayer game. The single player is a useless tutorial. Those that say it takes forever to kill someone, As others have said: This is a multiplayer game. The single player is a useless tutorial. Those that say it takes forever to kill someone, they don't know what they're doing. Each gun has a specific strength and weakness. If it takes them a whole clip to kill, then they aren't using their weapons wisely. The game gives way to many different styles and strategies. One load out may do really well one round, but the enemy can adapt and overcome with a new load out they create in the middle of the battle, on the field. DCM's (Dynamic Combat Missions) change the flow of the game and can usually only be accomplished by good team work. The dev's have struggled some, but they seem to be fairly responsive. Overall it's a very different FPS. It won't turn into the same point and shoot after a few days like the Halo's and COD's. It's different each time. Expand
  3. Nov 21, 2010
    9
    Section 8 was a good game that had a short campaign but the Multi-player made up for it.
    Has great graphics, excellent Multi-player that
    Section 8 was a good game that had a short campaign but the Multi-player made up for it.
    Has great graphics, excellent Multi-player that highly encourages you to work together with your buddy's to achieve the objective, but the short and kinda boring single-player campaign makes this a 9 out of 10.
    Expand
  4. AnonymousMC
    Sep 5, 2009
    8
    Multiplayer:I bought this game specifically for the multiplayer. The MP is 3/4 Battlefield 2 with the remaining parts made up of Tribes andMultiplayer:I bought this game specifically for the multiplayer. The MP is 3/4 Battlefield 2 with the remaining parts made up of Tribes and Halo. The primary game mode is like BF's conquest although I find it much less cumbersome to capture "Control Points" than in BF2. There are 2 ground vehicles as well as a handful of stationary deployables at one's disposal that can be used for offense or defense. Unlike Battlefield 2, I liked this game because the weapons have very little spread although it does take a LOT of damage to kill someone. The trick in being successful is to get a feel for the shield penetrating range of the weapons or learn to use grenades, mortars, or detpacks to drop the shields quickly. Yes, in addition to standard health (Armor) you also have a shield that protects you from longer range shots. Because of the large amount of damage it takes to kill an opponent, this game rewards working in small squads. My three major gripes for this game are 1) Slow strafe speed 2) The game comes with a lock-on feature that works like an aimbot. It is important to note that the lock-on feature can be countered with a Sensor Blocker device. 3) It's easy to track enemy players through walls using the enemy indicator arrow. This detracts from the "cat-and-mouse" of killing opponents. I used to play some competition in other games so I'm surprised the aimbot and wallhack functions haven't put me off this game. I kept playing it and having fun and hope to get 3-6 months of enjoyment out of the game. This game is very kind to newbies, so if you normally pass because it's too hard you should give it a shot.

    Singleplayer: This game was obviously designed as a multiplayer game with a singleplayer element tacked on at the end. I did NOT buy this game for the singleplayer so I am fine with that. Some of the things like orbital spawning work well in multiplayer but don't work well in singleplayer (one vehicle escort mission in particular jumps to mind). The story and dialogue plays like it was written as high school fan fiction. The dialogue in general is just a string of military jargon that reminds me of a bad 80s Vietnam movie. The writer is straining so much to make the characters tough and hard that they forget to make them human. However, the voice actors do the best they can with the material. In short, the singleplayer is more training for the multiplayer.
    Expand
  5. May 4, 2011
    8
    In my opinion, a shooter is a shooter. The only thing new a game can bring to the table these days is story and/or graphics... or so IIn my opinion, a shooter is a shooter. The only thing new a game can bring to the table these days is story and/or graphics... or so I thought. I disagree with the bashing of this game that so many others give so easily. I for one am sick and tired of the run-of-the-mill shooters that are out there. This game contains great science-fiction scenery and equipment, unique spawning, great visuals, and solid game play. These days the game only costs $10 brand new. How can you not justify a cost like that when much more generic shooters out there with no innovation whatsoever carry a $50-$70 price tag?? This game is balanced, unique, and rock-solid. Don't listen to the moronic CoD fan-boys out there who bash games for not being CoD. Every complaint I've ever heard about this game relates somehow back to the fact that this game doesn't work just like every other FPS. "GOOD" I say! "GREAT" even! Give me 100 more like this game before one more Call of Duty, Soldier of Fortune, Sniper Ghost Warrior, Turning Point, Turok, etc., etc., etc., Expand
  6. Jul 26, 2011
    5
    I know a lot of work goes into making games but I found little in Section 8 that I liked, it has some good ideas but the execution left a lotI know a lot of work goes into making games but I found little in Section 8 that I liked, it has some good ideas but the execution left a lot to be desired. I got bored and irritated by the second or third mission. Expand
  7. DomO
    Oct 24, 2009
    1
    Game had promise, but TG killed it with Auto Aim, terrible damage system, crappy net code, hostile forum moderators, no patches, bugged Game had promise, but TG killed it with Auto Aim, terrible damage system, crappy net code, hostile forum moderators, no patches, bugged dedicated servers, only a couple servers with players, but thats with bots. Maybe one server is populated at any given time. You can't see full servers, but they don't exist, don't be tricked. This game will bomb fast, only console kiddies play it. Expand

See all 26 User Reviews