User Score
7.9

Generally favorable reviews- based on 49 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 28 out of 49
  2. Negative: 3 out of 49
Buy On

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. Jul 13, 2017
    7
    Who is Andrew Bicknell? - i don't know. This is unknown skin and unknown actor of James Bond. In any case it is not good and not bad game. Because it has a primitive and modest plot
  2. May 26, 2017
    7
    Agent Under Fire is a good, but not a great Bond game. The campaign is fun, but the controls are kind of bad. You can change them to be tolerable, but they're still not great. If you can find this game for cheap, you might want to try it out because the multiplayer is fun.
  3. Nov 15, 2016
    7
    Not as good as Nightfire, but still decent. Its definitely not the best fps on the PS2, but it has its moments. Driving stages are a lot of fun in this game.
  4. Nov 13, 2014
    6
    Mediocre Bond title doesn't quite seem like it fits in with the Bond universe and the graphics have aged far worse than even Goldeneye 64. Not a bad game in the series but certainly a forgettable Bond adventure.
  5. Aug 12, 2013
    7
    This is a pretty game with sometimes confusing controls. There is no Pierce Brosnen or Daniel Craig here and I think that does matter a little bit. There is an auto aim going on. So, mostly you just run, stand in front of people that are shooting at you and fire back. I think the graphics and animation team did an excellent job that stands the test of time. The sound mix isn't very good atThis is a pretty game with sometimes confusing controls. There is no Pierce Brosnen or Daniel Craig here and I think that does matter a little bit. There is an auto aim going on. So, mostly you just run, stand in front of people that are shooting at you and fire back. I think the graphics and animation team did an excellent job that stands the test of time. The sound mix isn't very good at all when the guns start blazing. Everything is too loud. There are some big oversights with the gameplay. The game is on rails at times. Personally I don't think it started off very epic but it still feels like 007. For a 2001 FPS game its not bad, and its definitely better than Nightfire. The graphics and design are definitely some of the best I've seen on the PS2 and thats no small feat. But, get Everything or Nothing, which was crazy fun and challenging, instead. There are lots of James Bond Games nowadays and this one isn't the best. Its a certain type of eye-candy is where this shines with some cool camera work and animation. Expand
  6. GeorgeS.
    Aug 29, 2008
    7
    The game is great. But it looses 3 points. one because the controls are are difficult to handle,1 because it's not as good as nightfire,and everyone (including me) is stuck on level 8.
  7. TyC
    Feb 23, 2004
    6
    This game really disappointed me. I liked NightFire much better, and I can't wait to try Everything or Nothing Good Renter!
  8. Moeman
    May 31, 2002
    7
    Single player is somewhat entertaining, graphics are great, and the multiplayer is great fun.
  9. JulianH.
    Feb 24, 2002
    5
    This is the first game I got on the Playstation 2, and it was VERY entertaining. But some of the first things I started to noticed was that the controls had a way of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and also, the damage values and rates of fire for the weapons were WAY off. For example, the "ps100" (FN P90 in real life) is supposed to be armor piercing, but the thing hardly This is the first game I got on the Playstation 2, and it was VERY entertaining. But some of the first things I started to noticed was that the controls had a way of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and also, the damage values and rates of fire for the weapons were WAY off. For example, the "ps100" (FN P90 in real life) is supposed to be armor piercing, but the thing hardly goes through glass with enough power to kill in one headshot. Also, the way the AI in the game are just plain crappy. You can walk up on someone making NO noise at all, and they yell out "ITS BOND!" and shoot at you almost instantaneously. But other than all of that negativity, the game was extremely well done in the graphics department. The story line was o.k, but it got me through the wait to get "Gran Turismo 3." Expand
  10. DavidF.
    Feb 16, 2002
    7
    Better than "Goldeneye"? NO! The graphics are nice but the game lacks the frantic speed of "Timesplitters" and the multiplayer fun of "Goldeneye." Good, but not worth your money. Rent it.
  11. K.
    Feb 1, 2002
    7
    The first several levels are quite easy, yet entertaining. The later levels will test your skills. I was happily surprised to find that there were a few driving levels and they were very well done. Solid game, but there are better titles out there.

Awards & Rankings

#27 Most Discussed PS2 Game of 2001
#48 Most Shared PS2 Game of 2001
Metascore
72

Mixed or average reviews - based on 27 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 27
  2. Negative: 1 out of 27
  1. Games Radar
    88
    [Games Radar Rating = Hit] Although it isn't as revolutionary as GoldenEye once was, the deft changes of pace mean it's undoubtedly the most Bond-like game ever. It might not leave you shaken, but it's certainly stirring.
  2. It’s just a shame that the game is too easy, a little more time perfecting the enemy AI and level design would have seen this scored much highly, but in the end this is a good game for action fans and those wanting their next Bond fix.
  3. Slick, sexy and jam-packed with action — but this adventure is short with limited playability over time, except perhaps for its multiplayer modes.