Section 8: Prejudice PC

User Score
7.8

Generally favorable reviews- based on 106 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 63 out of 106
  2. Negative: 4 out of 106

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. May 5, 2011
    7
    Section 8: Prejudice is well priced. Any more and it would be a rip off; any less and it would be underselling itself. While the game is well polished in terms of visuals and controls, there are a few minor flaws which take away from the gameplay. For one thing, no off-hand grenades or melee attacks certainly place S8:P behind the curve of the modern FPS genre. The campaign isSection 8: Prejudice is well priced. Any more and it would be a rip off; any less and it would be underselling itself. While the game is well polished in terms of visuals and controls, there are a few minor flaws which take away from the gameplay. For one thing, no off-hand grenades or melee attacks certainly place S8:P behind the curve of the modern FPS genre. The campaign is understandably linear at best and frustratingly repetitive at worst. The multiplayer is entertaining, although I find myself building load-outs that mimic Bad Company 2 or COD.

    The game feels like a cross between Unreal Tournament 3, Halo and Gears of War. It's a fun game for what it is. Easy to pick up and easy to put down.
    Expand
  2. Nov 12, 2011
    6
    With so many FPSs on the market today, you've got to be really good to impress me. Yeah, the game looks and plays better than the original but it still doesn't go far enough to make me want to buy it again. The gameplay lacks that "I gotta do it" feel. Just feels rather plain, like a me-too version of every other FPS that is out there.
  3. Sep 12, 2012
    6
    When I played it it was fun. Until I got bored with it an hour later. Yes, I would only play this if I'm bored, but I don't really see anything special in this game, try getting it when its discounted.(i did)
  4. May 6, 2011
    6
    First, only consider if you're only really interested in online multplayer, like me. Game play despite what you might read is more COD than battlefield (Older players may remember Tribes ;) And online it would do AMAZINGLY well for the money if there was any trace of balance in it. Apparently there is auto balancing in it, according to a robotic lady voice anyway, but I've never seen aFirst, only consider if you're only really interested in online multplayer, like me. Game play despite what you might read is more COD than battlefield (Older players may remember Tribes ;) And online it would do AMAZINGLY well for the money if there was any trace of balance in it. Apparently there is auto balancing in it, according to a robotic lady voice anyway, but I've never seen a trace of it. Oh, and thanks to deployable anti aircraft structures they've made a game where it's theoretically possible to make it's impossible to spawn.. anywhere!. Not seen it fully done yet but nearly on one game. And EMP grenades are OP to the point where everything else is pointless. Seriously, it's silly. Why put all those other items in when everyone is only kitting EMP grenades. Next time guys, get the public to playtest and not the developers. It's the only reason I can think of to end up with gaping holes into what would otherwise would be a solid 8/9 online FP shooter (Or even 10 considering the low price) Expand
  5. stg
    May 6, 2011
    6
    Took a while to get it working - it has a conflict with Comodo Internet Security, which required whitelisting the game.

    The graphics are pretty good, if not stellar. The game is certainly playable, but the single-player experience doesn't feel anywhere near special, and overall it just feels too simple-minded - the enemies pop-up from nowhere, and it is way too easy to shoot them, with
    Took a while to get it working - it has a conflict with Comodo Internet Security, which required whitelisting the game.

    The graphics are pretty good, if not stellar.

    The game is certainly playable, but the single-player experience doesn't feel anywhere near special, and overall it just feels too simple-minded - the enemies pop-up from nowhere, and it is way too easy to shoot them, with basically no tactical thinking. The sniper gun, for example, kills on one shoot both in the legs or on the head, which takes away a lot of the fun.
    Expand
  6. Nov 4, 2012
    5
    This game is total **** fo real, didnt like it yo, this cat be angry at da gamplay not being tight y`all. I got a bit p*ssed at dis game den i go smoke some bud and it all be good adda dat so i be like giving this game a 5 becasue it not all da show it wad cracked up to be.
  7. Sep 8, 2011
    7
    I like this game but don't seem to be playing it much. It is a very good, original game and very well made. I wish I could put my finger on what it is that I don't like about it - possibly the maps are too small?
  8. Oct 7, 2011
    6
    Some of the greatest combat I've seen in a while. INSANELY FUN. Definitely worth $15. Great campaign, but the multiplayer is the amazing part, it will provide at least 8 hours a week of fun. And the campaign has good dialog and humor. I think it's a great time, but there are a few things to count as a bad time.
  9. Feb 16, 2012
    7
    The game is a good fps, sectioned in missions and checkpoints like many others.
    You have a jet-pack that adds some mobility to it, making it look a bit more fast paced. But, in fact, the game is a lot more static than it should, the sprint system is really bad. Somehow, this game has some level of customization, but most people will use similar sets of weapons and upgrades. The upgrades
    The game is a good fps, sectioned in missions and checkpoints like many others.
    You have a jet-pack that adds some mobility to it, making it look a bit more fast paced. But, in fact, the game is a lot more static than it should, the sprint system is really bad. Somehow, this game has some level of customization, but most people will use similar sets of weapons and upgrades. The upgrades are too weak, while the base character too strong. In other words, you can't really tell if someone is using a fully defensive/fully offensive or mixed set of upgrades just by fighting him. They should make the character weaker and allow us to really upgrade it, add more upgrade points, resulting in a bigger degree of customization. The multiplayer side of the game is really good, an fps with some TD spice and play-time dynamic objectives (randomly generated, can be boring sometimes). The game can be really improved in the next versions, a better storyline for campaign and balances along with the problems stated above. It would get a 8.5, so, 9. Due to Windows live being mandatory, it'll be a 7.
    Expand
  10. Apr 14, 2012
    5
    Finnished this game's single player story in 7 hours.
    Story has a lame ending, feels rushed.
    Mulit-Player Combat is nothing to write home about.
    The only remotly fun aspect it the swarm mode in multi-player...thats it.

    Not really worth picking this up unless it is really really cheap and you got the cash to burn.
  11. Apr 22, 2012
    6
    Not bad for be a low price game, sadly multiplayer part is dead, community went to like 50 players around the world in less then 2 weeks, the campaign mode isn't bad, but if you want some good FPS i think there's much better around.
  12. Dec 17, 2012
    6
    This is pretty close to BC2 in space. For $15 you get a 6-8 hour single player campaign (that walks you through all the weapons, off-hands, and maps), a Swarm mode where you defend a base against waves of increasingly difficult enemies, and 2 pvp modes. These consist of Conquest mode (where you hold control points for tickets and do DCMs for bonus tickets) and Assault mode (teams takeThis is pretty close to BC2 in space. For $15 you get a 6-8 hour single player campaign (that walks you through all the weapons, off-hands, and maps), a Swarm mode where you defend a base against waves of increasingly difficult enemies, and 2 pvp modes. These consist of Conquest mode (where you hold control points for tickets and do DCMs for bonus tickets) and Assault mode (teams take turns defending 4 bases and the faster team to cap wins the map). Customization consists of 2 main weapons slots (shotguns, RLs, MGs, pistols, etc.), 2 off-hands (various tools and explosives), skin choices, and defense/offense loadouts. Each weapon also has unlocks for different ammo/explosion types so the customization is deep. You also get cash for objectives/kills/assists/etc. to airdrop in buildings and vehicles so your money management can change the flow of battle greatly. Don't let the GFWL scare you (it only manages Friends list & achievements) and pick this up if you enjoy team-oriented FPSs. Expand
  13. Oct 3, 2015
    7
    With so many FPSs on the market today, you've got to be really good to impress me. Yeah, the game looks and plays better than the original but it still doesn't go far enough to make me want to buy it again. The gameplay lacks that "I gotta do it" feel. Just feels rather plain, like a me-too version of every other FPS that is out there.
  14. Jun 22, 2016
    7
    Reasonably competent team shooter with hefty-feeling controls and weapons, and excellent visual effects. It's been so long since i've played it that I'm not sure if it still has a playerbase or not, but I enjoyed it at the time.
Metascore
77

Generally favorable reviews - based on 22 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 22
  2. Negative: 0 out of 22
  1. PC Format
    Jul 12, 2011
    72
    A budget game that delivers a budget experience. [Aug 2011, p.102]
  2. PC Games (Russia)
    Jun 24, 2011
    85
    The single player campaign is solid, but it's multiplayer that makes every cent of this $15-game worth. [July 2011, p.114]
  3. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Jun 23, 2011
    50
    Pure multiplayer action game. Low budget doesn't mean less fun if you're not looking for any added value. [June 2011]