Call of Duty: Finest Hour Xbox


Mixed or average reviews - based on 55 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 27 out of 55
  2. Negative: 0 out of 55
Buy On
  1. What singles out this series from the rest is that it homes in on the sheer intensity and ugliness of war.
  2. One thing Call of Duty: Finest Hour manages to do with success is take everything from graphics to sound, from music to gameplay; and toss it all into one big can of whoop-ass and make a great game.
  3. The game is realistic and fun, albeit an on-rails shooter at the core. Some parts of the game just beg to be replayed while others have you scratching your head why they aren't longer to begin with.
  4. A perfect example of how attention to detail can make an average game much more than the norm. First-person shooters are nothing new, and even though Finest Hour doesn't really introduce any groundbreaking aspects into the gaming world it does show just how well crafted a video game can be, blurring the line between gaming and cinema.
  5. 88
    While not the most difficult or longest FPS game on the Xbox, or PS2 it is a competent shooter, and is worth checking out.
  6. Play Magazine
    I love the urgency of a slow-to-load rifle, the way your fumbling and learned cadence strikes a unique tension in the shootouts; too bad the clumsy grenades aren't nearly as much fun. [Jan 2005, p.60]
  7. 86
    I hope to see the community surprised by the shockingly high production values which its single player holds. That being said however, the multiplayer game of Call of Duty: Finest Hour is practically a throw away. The game modes are generic, communication poorly chosen, and fun level is shockingly low.
  8. Game Informer
    Much like the PC Call of Duty (which I should note is a completely different game), this console title features a brilliant targetting mechanism that allows players to zoom in and aim down the sight of the firearm. [Jan 2005, p.115]
  9. 85
    Unlike "Rising Sun," Finest Hour goes beyond the epidermal layer and strives to provide a realistic yet still engaging and addictive experience on all fronts, not just for your eyes. And, luckily enough, it succeeds.
  10. The game's single-player campaign is enjoyable despite some questionable design choices, and the multiplayer is capable, as well. That said, while Finest Hour is always good and often times great, it never quite reaches excellence.
  11. Throughout the game, you'll be thrust into different roles. Before it ends, you'll have been an American, Russian and British solider. Each of these soldiers will have their 'day in the sun' so to speak.
  12. It's the best of its kind on the consoles with the historical details, cinematic gameplay and fun factor overwhelming some unoriginality and glitches.
  13. Xbox Nation Magazine
    The shoddy A.I. and other flaws are rare or negligible enough so as not to detract from the overall enjoyment of an otherwise great game. [Jan 2005, p.89]
  14. AceGamez
    With the lovely graphics comes lovely sound.
  15. Electronic Gaming Monthly
    Even though gameplay is pretty much the opposite of innovation (with the exception of the multiple characters, and more chances to drive a tank compared to the PC version), the presentation is second to none. [Jan 2005, p.124]
  16. 80
    Although the single player campaign is on the short side, a solid multiplayer mode will ensure that you'll still be playing it a few months from now. If you're looking to fight in the Big One, it's time to answer the call.
  17. A wild ride through some of mankind's most violent episodes holds its own against the orginal PC masterpiece.
  18. The lack of any cohesive story spread thin by too many distracting viewpoints kept me from ever getting involved with the characters. It was almost like I was trapped in an episode of "Quantum Leap."
  19. Expect to be frustrated anyway. The tank levels are the worst offenders, with missiles coming at you from every direction, your armor evaporating like dry ice, and the bizarre rules under which you're allowed to disembark.
  20. Going into and out of some of WWII's most intense battles will keep you coming back for more. If you can get by the average graphics and a couple of A.I. wobbles you'll have a great time playing this game.
  21. If there had been offline multiplayer support, the score would've been higher for the game.
  22. At the end of the day it just feels like another run of the mill shooter.
  23. A fine WWII shooter, but doesn't quite capture the pure intensity of the PC version.
  24. With the exception of the very first level (the Battle of Stalingrad) you hardly get the sense of urgency that you should feel while playing this game.
  25. If it existed in a vacuum it'd rank better, but this is a strong holiday for videogame shooters.
  26. Pelit (Finland)
    Too linear and short, but it has a nice atmosphere to it and many enjoyable missions. Poor graphics and moronic companions detract from the experience, though. [Jan. 05]
  27. For those who have played the original PC version, I'm sorry to say that the console version just doesn't meet up to it in the end.
  28. The weapons look good and are nicely designed.
  29. 73
    Finest Hour has been "consolized" and turned from a somewhat challenging and often intense PC first-person shooter into a bland, run-and-gun console pop-gun game.
  30. This game has committed a cardinal sin, and that sin is mediocrity. Nothing is special about it, and while it does have a fun, cinematic feel and some nicely featured historical missions, it simply does not feel memorable. Maybe I shouldn't have compared it to the original, but I have. Sue me.
  31. A fun game that could have been made a lot more enjoyable by adding a couple of checkpoints here and there.
  32. GMR Magazine
    The game's presentation is incredible... Unfortunately, the A.I. should have spent more time in basic training. [Feb 2005, p.87]
  33. As it stands, it hasn't re-ignited much other than a vague feeling that we should pull the PC version out of the cupboard and play it again.
  34. A WWII game with nice moments and a good storyline; but as a game it fails on a number of points and its distinct lack of innovation makes it hard to recommend to anyone but fans of the genre.
  35. Official Xbox Magazine
    A decent experience, but not one you're likely to spend much time with. [Jan 2005, p.72]
  36. A lack of checkpoints, imperfect weapon design and control along with a lack of a story that players will care for makes this the low point for the impressive franchise.
  37. Spark took hold of the project to completion and while the game is fairly decent, it is a shame they didn't have the spark to polish it as much as the PC version.
  38. 70
    There's an awful lot of linear, shooting-gallery tedium you have to plod through to get to the good stuff.
  39. Had the feel of the weapons been a little better, and had the campaign been more consistently intense, Finest Hour could have been a much better game.
  40. netjak
    First and foremost, the amount of shots it can take to kill your enemies is absurd. It's so inconsistent that not even a headshot will always drop your enemies, and I have a HUGE problem with that.
  41. If I couldn't complain about the graphics or sound, then I certainly could about the game's AI. It borders on incompetent and if you're AI allies aren't running right in front of you cutting off your line of fire, then they're charging head-first into an enemy machine gun nest.
  42. This could have been Activision's finest hour, but it looks likely to be nothing more than an agonising five minutes of fame.
  43. While the single-player mode offers enough missions and options, it can become old quickly. As far as the online mode, the 16-player matches are nice yet, tend to become boring due to the overall mechanics of the game.
  44. 62
    As a whole, Call of Duty: Finest Hour feels like it was poorly assembled with shoddy A.I. and lacklustre graphics. Couple that with short, uninteresting missions and main characters that you couldn't care less about, and you have a game that may be worth a day's play but is a title that you wouldn't want to in your own library.
  45. games(TM)
    The atmosphere is electric, the sense of making tiny in-roads to solve a great problem as satisfying as it is frustrating... Spark never allows you to forget that outside the restrictive confines of the first-person viewpoint there's a much, much bigger fight going on involving thousands of men. [Jan 2005, p.110]
  46. But the problems with the game can be summed up in a mission to defend a factory, where failure meant game over rather than the continuation of the battle from that point on.
  47. Finest Hour is a heavily-scripted experience, almost to the point of being completely on rails. Things happen because they're scripted to happen, not because they're an organic outgrowth of the gameplay.
  48. 60
    But playing this game live on the console systems lacks the finesse and speed to which you're accustomed. Lag is apparent everywhere, from watching other players float across the ground to empting an entire magazine into a foe at close range with no effect.
  49. 60
    If some of the difficulty settings didn't feel so unbalanced, we'd have liked more time in North Africa, as that campaign feels the most fresh out of the three.
  50. Call of Duty doesn't blast its way onto the Xbox but rather trips over its own feet onto a pile of live grenades. It's an enjoyable first person shooter, but its many glitches (especially those found in the online mode) are extremely annoying, and the game is just too linear for its own good.
  51. Although missions are well-designed and combat can be intense, sequences such as the battle to reclaim Stalingrad lack the scale and cinematic grandeur of the PC version.
  52. Nothing but a rushed, messy and lacklustre attempt to cash in on a popular PC franchise during the Christmas rush period.
  53. 'Average Hour' would seem a better appellation for Call of Duty: Finest Hour.
  54. Even if I hadn't played the crap out of the game series on the PC, I would have still felt the game was lacking any significant punch to set itself ahead of the market for its time.
  55. While offering a well-scripted narrative, comes up with precious few reasons to play out these battles again. No surprises here -- just solid, albeit predictable, action that could have been better.

Awards & Rankings

#37 Most Discussed Xbox Game of 2004
#20 Most Shared Xbox Game of 2004
User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 22 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 12
  2. Negative: 2 out of 12
  1. BlueFalcon
    Nov 28, 2004
    It's a slightly above average title. The game plays similar to medal of honor frontline, except not as well executed. There's many It's a slightly above average title. The game plays similar to medal of honor frontline, except not as well executed. There's many scripted events and a set path which you must follow (or die). The whole war atmosphere is well done, but the graphics aren't exceptional. In particular, the textures in the environment look grainy and unnatural. Many of the missions seem unexceptional too. It's like they included all the cutting room floor levels or something. While this isn't the worst war game to come out recently, it's not something that's particularly memorable. Full Review »
  2. Rick
    Mar 2, 2006
    Me and my nephew played this straight thru as it was a challenge. The gameplay keeps you on your seat and unlike the just released Call of Me and my nephew played this straight thru as it was a challenge. The gameplay keeps you on your seat and unlike the just released Call of Duty 2 the A.I doesnt suck. You dont have squad members taking up all your fire like the sequel so to survive and beat the damn thing you have to hug every corner and attempt assualts from different paths. Buy this, rent the sequel. Full Review »
  3. Zach
    Mar 4, 2005
    I think this game is a good title.It has its hard parts but over all it is quite good. A very good WW2 game.