- Publisher: Atari
- Release Date: Nov 11, 2003
- Also On: PlayStation 2
- Critic Score
- Most active
- Publication
- Most clicked
-
A technically sound game that exudes banality.
-
After popping this game in, I was immediately impressed by the amount of features available.
-
50Add to this the fact that the total gameplay time (minus cut-scenes) clocks in at a measly two and a half hours, and this game is definitely only a weekend rental.
-
46Boring and sub-par gameplay, combined with bland visuals and sounds, creates a gaming experience that should be missed. More time was needed fine tuning things such as game mechanics, visuals, and audio.
-
While it's cool to watch John get wacked in one of the nice CG cutscenes, the actual six hours of gameplay leaves much, much, much to be desired. [Feb 2004, p.82]
-
45A shoddy game that could have been something. This game has a very rushed feeling to it. The controls are not perfected, the aiming is way off, the AI is a push over, and the mission structure is laughable.
-
Besides the fact that I should never be able to sit down and beat a game in my first sitting, there's absolutely nothing that makes me want to go back and play it again.
-
Short unbalanced levels, simplistic gameplay with auto-targeting, and first-generation graphics doom this game to bargain bins everywhere.
-
40Throw in some uninspired third-person brawling, and, well, this turkey comes out as dry as the Sahara. [Feb 2004, p.86]
-
40There are few redeeming qualities and this title should be avoided.
-
It's just plain bad. What's worse is that either the developer or the publisher is fully aware of how atrocious Rise Of The Machines is. This is of course complete speculation but...
-
40A few fighting scenes and some great cinema sequences don't do much to jazz up this tired shooter.
-
40What should have been a fast-paced, movie-fueled action fest is bogged down by overly sluggish controls, Vaseline-smeared graphics, and a general lack of polish.
-
37Feels like a rushed hack-job of a game, with just barely enough cohesive action to keep it from completely falling apart at the seams.
-
35I recognized this game as having eclipsed "Fugitive Hunter" as the least enjoyable console shooter of the year.
-
Enemy AI is shoddy, as is the hit-detection. The graphics are also deficient, with nearly every element in the game looking bland. [Apr 2004, p.9]
-
T3's first-person shooting stages are plagued by poor controls, terrible level designs, brain-dead enemies, and just plain ugly graphics. [Feb 2004, p.106]
-
30So much presentation and bulked up features, with nothing of substance underneath.
-
30I can sum it up with one word: sloppy.
-
Go easy on yourself here, and watch the only FMV worth watching: the DVD of the film this mercury-like pile of T-1000 excrement is based on. [Mar 2004, p.79]
-
20Bad looking, worst sounding, poor playing and bug-ridden. In the end analysis, buy the DVD and enjoy the movie - leave the game on the shelf.
-
Anemic character animation and poor modeling, which really don't get much worse in modern game design. [Jan 2004, p.66]
-
The graphics are abhorrent. The models are ugly, simplistic, and repetitive.
-
But the saddest part has to be the staggering number of people who worked on this thing, including some well-respected developers. Just check the credits from the manual. I’m not counting them all, but that’s about 400 names.
prev
next
Page:
- 1
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 0 out of 3
-
Mixed: 0 out of 3
-
Negative: 3 out of 3
-
FANBOY2I liked Dawn of Fate, but this game makes DoF look like a game of the year winner.
-
DaveB.0
-
SteveE.3The reason I give it a 3 is because of the use of Arnie`s voice in this diabolical disgrace from atari.