Metascore
56

Mixed or average reviews - based on 11 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 11
  2. Negative: 2 out of 11
  1. Do the front lines give you the shakes? Then skip the "let's go boys!" bravado, settle into a more comfortable overhead viewpoint, and orchestrate 40 missions that include famous battles like D-Day and Operation Market Garden. [Aug 2004, p.90]
  2. The graphics are refreshingly crisp and clear, while the battlefield sound effects are spot on, incorporating a medley of explosions, machinegun fire and desperate battle cries.
  3. It's clear to see that the developer was going for a certain balance of historical accuracy and pick up and play mechanics that should appeal to just about anyone with a great deal of patience.
  4. Brings some exciting new action RPG elements to the WWII genre. However, the repetitive nature of the mission structures and the frustrating camera will likely keep you from being interested in for a long period of time.
  5. The Snowblind engine is as solid as ever, but when transferred to a timeframe where enemies use guns and are able to shoot you from way off screen, the gameplay crumbles pretty quickly.
  6. Aside from the somewhat devastating problems with the camera, Combat Elite is a nifty little number that has all the addictiveness, interaction, and 'pick up and play' of many retro titles that people still cherish today.
  7. 55
    With a redesigned targeting system, more advanced controls (duck and shoot should not be the extent of it), a tweaked camera and a campaign with story and character to ferry players from beginning to end, Combat Elite could have been fantastic. But that's just wishful thinking.
  8. The game ends up feeling pretty shallow, with an odd control mechanism and camera angle, as well as a light RPG system that doesn't seem all that balanced.
  9. The only snag: You spend most of Combat Elite shooting at offscreen Germans, placing you at a natural and frustrating disadvantage. [Sept 2004, p.100]
  10. Throw in some bland graphics, awful voice acting, and AI unable to react to events in teh environment - like a grenade landing at its feet - and not even a two-player co-op mode can save this one. [Aug 2004, p.79]
  11. Everything in this title borders on barely functional, from the blurry graphics (no, that isn't Vaseline on your TV screen) to the imprecise targeting. [Aug 2004, p.96]
User Score
tbd

No user score yet- Awaiting 2 more ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 1
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 1
  3. Negative: 1 out of 1
  1. J.
    Feb 13, 2006
    2
    I very rarely rate games low. I am a programmer as well as a games (from board to role-playing) enthusiast. It seems that these make me FAR more patient and understanding than the average video gamer. At least it always seems that way. Be this as it may, I had to take the time to come here and vote this game with what I feel is an accurate score. It is bad beyond excuse. I am more than willing to put up with game annoyances (GTA combat is horrible, but the rest of the game mroe than makes up for it, other games are terribly difficult but their save/check point systems offset this). This title, however, has so many that there is nothing good to get out of it. First, the camera is bad. This would not be all that terrible, but when it is coupled with an aiming system that is also terrible, it makes the game nothing more than a die and retry after you learn where the enemies are. I am no graphics hoe, but the very lame visuals are another nail. The voicing is not bad, but the script is so silly and weak that it comes across as less than mediocre. There are invisbile walls every where channeling you into a very linear path. The missions are short and shoddy (their shortness is actually almost a benefit with how close to unplayable it is, at least you don't have that far to go to get through a level...) All in all, I cannot recall being this disapointed and frustrated with a game. Full Review »