Bodycount Review

By Rich Stanton Published 2 September, 2011

Surprisingly low.

Version tested: Xbox 360

You can tell a lot about a game from its Achievements. After one hour and six minutes of playing Bodycount, it had doled out 335 points. Not only are the names uninspired ('Boombastic' - really?) but they're handed out in great chunks for standard progression. Unlock a new ability, another 50 points. That's not generosity - it's desperation.

Bodycount is a desperately average FPS, a poorly-conceived and barely finished rush-job entering the most over-saturated genre around. It has a campaign clocking in at around four hours, a multiplayer mode that redefines bare bones, enemies that don't respond to your presence, and a frankly terrible line in costumes.

This was supposed to be Black's spiritual sequel - a line that Codemasters has been playing down since the departure of Bodycount's spookily-named former project lead Stuart Black. But Bodycount loses out in every way to Black, a game released five years ago on last-generation hardware. There's no point in dwelling on the comparison just to stick the boot in, but you wonder why it was made in the first place.

Bodycount's weapons are mundane versions of the usual suspects: pistol, shotgun, machine-gun, etc. There's a decent enough alien shotgun/grenade launcher hybrid waiting in the game's final third, which blows up enemies with crackling purple electricity, but needless to say it's not really worth the entry fee.

Bodycount's shooting, in terms of aiming and firing, is reasonably tuned and could have been the basis of a better game, but here it's constantly hampered by a terrible cover mechanic and a travesty of a melee attack, and that's before we even mention what you're shooting at.

The cover system, such as it is, is based around holding the left trigger while hiding behind something to peek out from the side. You'll use it intentionally maybe five times, if that, in the whole campaign, yet it shares a trigger with normal aiming. This means that if the game thinks you're in cover while aiming, moving your sight around can suddenly jerk the screen sideways - and it's not the most gracefully presented move. Bodycount's fighting doesn't even demand a cover system, never mind one that's neither use nor ornament.

Backing up this misfire is a destruction system that's downright archaic. Next to what Battlefield has been doing for years and years, Bodycount's effort is paltry. When behind cover, chunks of it will go flying when the bullets hit, and elements of the scenery can be shot or knifed through. That's it. There's no grand scale to it. Certain bits of the environments are destructible while others are not.

But what does for Bodycount is its enemies. The game's spawning mechanism for each level has these chumps running towards their assigned start point, which often seems to be behind the player, before attacking. So for much of Bodycount you'll be sprinting forwards to a checkpoint while the four or five men supposed to stop you sprint in the other direction. It's bizarre.

Things don't get any better once they start attacking. A dumb horde is fine, in its own way, but Bodycount's troops are lemmings, relentlessly jamming into doorways, bunching near explosive barrels, and rushing into the hail of fire that killed their mate.

Sometimes they'll ignore you completely. Just stop in the middle of a firefight, look in a different direction and turn motionless. At one point a crack team of five troopers came undone when they huddled near a barrel, and one threw a grenade that bounced off the head of another and fell at their feet. I'm not making this up.

Worst of all, they can see through walls. At least, that's the only explanation for the deadly-accurate fire that traces you through buildings. If you die in Bodycount, it's always because you're just walking forwards trying to end it all - stay safe and take it slow, and these clowns will never once get the better of you. Except if you try to melee them. The farce of Bodycount's combat is complete with a useless, disembodied knife swipe that's more of a flail, usually followed by the ignominy of being downed by an enemy using the same animation. It's one of the worst melees ever.

But although Bodycount's enemy AI is remarkably poor, the strange thing is that the levels are clearly designed for something better. This is a linear shooter, but its major environments are multi-levelled and expansive - the kind of place that would be perfect for, say, a ruck with the Covenant.

But the potential of enemy troops like the medic - who revives dead troops as stronger zombie versions - and scavenger, who hoovers up all of your rewards and runs away like the goblin from Golden Axe, is never realised on these clumsy battlefields. Whatever the aspirations were, the hugely disappointing group dynamic of Bodycount's enemies make its better ideas no more than footnotes.

Points are awarded for 'skillshots', but these are unimaginative to the extreme: headshots, explosive kills, kills through cover, and variants thereof. Chaining them together is the route to a big level score, but the elephant in the room is Bulletstorm. People Can Fly's recent FPS not only does the same trick in a much more mechanically accomplished fashion, but has so much more flair, imagination and fun about it.

The skillshot feature, like so much else of Bodycount, feels like it's going through the motions. Getting major scores doesn't reward you with anything other than a global leaderboard, and in the days when games are drowning us in more stats and persistence than ever before, Bodycount has almost nothing. Even the multiplayer, the one area you'd expect to find some kind of avatar to tinker with, is absolutely bare bones in its presentation.

Needless to say, multiplayer is a truly stillborn effort. Including only Deathmatch and Team Deathmatch modes, along with a small clutch of maps, two teams duke it out to be first to 50 kills.

The presence of 'intel' after killing enemies, which is used to charge up special moves, adds a nice coda to the usual deathmatch exchange - the victor has to claim part of their spoils - and the destruction plays much more of a noticeable role than in single-player, so by the end of most maps the key buildings look like Swiss cheese.

Those are two decent ideas in a sea of mediocrity, however, and sometimes even worse. The respawning is especially terrible, and needless to say even early players have worked out where to camp out for easy kills. Among the many crazy things about Bodycount is that its influences are clear and yet not a single one of its features can compete with what other games have been doing as a matter of course for many years.

You begin to think that behind Bodycount there is perhaps the story of an heroic development team tasked with doing far too much with far too little, who have performed a minor miracle in simply shipping something that works. Well, works some of the time. It's an explanation. But the killer fact about Bodycount is that it's nowhere near good enough to compete in the FPS arena, and serves nobody - player, developer or publisher.

4 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Rich.

About Rich Stanton

Rich Stanton has been writing for Eurogamer since 2011, and also contributes to places like Edge, Nintendo Gamer, and PC Gamer. He lives in Bath, and is Terran for life.

Read more articles from Rich by visiting the Rich Stanton archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (91) Latest comment 9 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • RustyBullet #1 9 months ago

    Bloody Hell. Iwas looking forward to this as well.

  • meggsy #2 9 months ago

    Another British dev closes in 3..2...1..

    Edit: @ BigDaddy - This was made by Codemasters Guildford - that studio was bolstered to make this very game.
    http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/codema...
    Edited by meggsy at 02/09/11 @ 14:42

  • evilrobot #3 9 months ago

    Post deleted at 22:12:53 08-05-2012

  • dragerboy #4 9 months ago

    'Another British dev closes in 3..2...1..' hilarious

    Im surprised it got 4/10 after playing the demo. Truly awful.

  • Ultrasoundwave #5 9 months ago

    Wow - i knew this was getting mixed reviews but i wasnt expecting that. Its unfortunate that any FPS that tries to try something different from COD doesnt end up selling well, seems like this will follow that trend.

    Might still rent this anyway....

  • Deathbysoup #6 9 months ago

    no surprise really, the demo was generic and uninspiring.

    When will developers realise you need to do something SPECIAL to make it in the FPS world these days.

  • schnide #7 9 months ago

    The demo had issues but it wasn't THAT bad! I enjoyed it a lot more than the Driver demo, and to be honest I would've thought the scores for those two games would've been reversed when they came out.

  • Mr_Fujisawa #8 9 months ago

    Maybe now they can sack off the useless expensive studio that was Guildford and invest the money elsewhere. The game was destined to be crap from the day it was ill-conceived.

  • midnight_walker #9 9 months ago

    I'll wait and see what the players say. Could be another Mafia II! It could well be shit though.

  • evild_edd #10 9 months ago

    OUCH. I had hopes for this, but something about the videos didn't quite look right. Such a shame that a game trying to do something a little different (with the anchored cover system) didn't have a better experience surrounding it. Really disappointing.

  • UkHardcore23 #11 9 months ago

    Demo was awful, not surprised at the score.

  • wizlon #12 9 months ago

    Aye, the demo wasn't THAT bad but the popgun sounding machinegun and terrible ironsights cover thingy just sent alarmbells ringing.

  • RedSparrows #13 9 months ago

    DOesn't sound like it's because it's 'different' - it's not. It sounds like it's just plain poor.

  • zegerman1942 #14 9 months ago

    Harsh but fair. After the demo surprised it's not lower. Bargain bin next week, plus those that actually pre-ordered will probably trade in fairly quick? Easy 1000 achievement points by the sounds of it.

  • arcam #15 9 months ago

    When will developers realise you need to do something SPECIAL to make it in the FPS world these days.

    Um, no you don't. Plenty of bland and boring shooters turn a decent profit, and I wouldn't be surprised if this does too.

  • spekkeh #16 9 months ago

    You can tell a lot about a game from its Achievements. After one hour and six minutes of playing Bodycount, it had doled out 335 points. Not only are the names uninspired ('Boombastic' - really?) but they're handed out in great chunks for standard progression. Unlock a new ability, another 50 points. That's not generosity - it's desperation

    I'm not sure why this is chalked up as a negative. I personally find it borderline offensive that finishing a game like LA Noire, and doing quite a bit of sidestuff lands you 260/1200 gamerpoints. Too many games have you perform meaningless stuff that have absolutely nothing to do with the main gist of the game for their achievements.
    Doing exactly what the designers intended should be the thing that is encouraged with achievements, because if it's a good designed game then, well, this should be the most fun. I now generally regard people with a high gamerscore, not as elite gamers, but as people with absolutely no joy in life.
    Edited by spekkeh at 02/09/11 @ 12:49

  • Kano-11 #17 9 months ago

    It takes balls of steel to release a demo when your game is really that shoddy.
    Edited by Kano-11 at 02/09/11 @ 12:49

  • menage #18 9 months ago

    ouch

    most important fps of this generation?

  • arcam #19 9 months ago

    Too many games have you perform meaningless stuff that have absolutely nothing to do with the main gist of the game for their achievements.

    Isn't that the point of achievements? What's the point of giving someone a reward for killing an enemy or getting to level 3 when you were going to do that anyway? I always achievements were there to encourage you to experiment and try out cool and unusual things.

  • Snufkin #20 9 months ago

    Sigh. Such a waste. But after 5 mins with the woeful demo I could see this coming. Whoever thought it was a good idea to put the cover system and ironsights on the same button needs there head read.

  • RedPanda #21 9 months ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • chessboxer #22 9 months ago

    I tried the demo on Weds, it was shit. It played like shit and looked even worse... I think I had more fun with the Haze demo.

    Glad I didn't waste money on a pre-order.

  • Lemming81 #23 9 months ago

    meggsy, tbh codemasters is not a studio I will miss. They were bloody awful with their handling of WAR and DDO Euro servers. A far cry from their glory days in the early nineties.

  • shen #24 9 months ago

    Sounds good. I'll give it a try.

  • parrapa #25 9 months ago

    After playing the demo it felt clear they hadn't learnt anything from 'The Club's' sales figures and how that type of game comes across to the customers - If they had just stuck with a sequel to Black we would have all been happy.

  • berelain #26 9 months ago

    The demo was generic, but I did hope that the full game might harbour something better - more fun weapons, a half-decent story - looks like it really is as bland as the demo suggested.

  • tankboi #27 9 months ago

    Sounds great! Can't wait to play it!

  • lordofthedunce #28 9 months ago

    @parrapa

    erm wasn't The Club dev Bizarre and publisher Sega?!

  • Douche #29 9 months ago

    I thought the demo was decent. I wouldn't have gave the demo a 4. The review seems utterly at odds with the earlier hands on preview on this site which was pretty positive from what i remember.

    Of course it depends on who is reviewing the game, but some of the scores Eurogamer have awarded for average games - Borderlands, Just Cause 2 - make me suprised this scored a 4.

  • Monkey_Puncher #30 9 months ago

    Gah, there was me hoping for a good arcade shooter :(

    Just hope the rumours of a new Timesplitters are true!

  • Sunjammer #31 9 months ago

    AI is not a feature intrinsic to a game engine. They had bad AI devs or not enough time. AI is hard. They should have just licensed kynogon or some other such proven middleware. Rolling your own in today's environment demands some serious ability.

  • Gearskin #32 9 months ago

    Liked the demo. Would have bought this today if it wasn't released the same month as... Deus Ex, Star Fox 3DS, Space Marine, Gears of War 3.

    That's off the top of my head.

  • BBIAJ #33 9 months ago

    @Ap3xx:

    If you pull the Left Trigger halfway, you can still move.

    Try reading the controls when prompted to next time.

  • Retro_ #34 9 months ago

    They made the mistake of releasing the Demo, without which I wouldn't of known to cancel my pre-order. Its almost as if they wanted to tell everyone that their game sucked big time. anyhoo, thanks for the heads up, pre-order cancelled as a result.
    Edited by Retro_ at 02/09/11 @ 13:22

  • Whizzo #35 9 months ago

    The demo felt like something from the first 12 months of this generation but it still wouldn't have been worth playing back then.

  • DefendoCroc #36 9 months ago

    Omg lol, EG you have actually restored my faith in you. FailMasters AI will always be the pinncale of wank.

  • Big-Swiss #37 9 months ago

    shit, sad to see how most other FPS games apear and disapear within weeks and are never heard of again.

    the game scored 10/10 with the name of the title, but after that its all bad news, 4/10 ;-((
    if everything in the review is true, it sounds really bad.....

  • Goffee #38 9 months ago

    The preview seemed to think the scenery destruction, cover mechanic and weapons line-up were rather good. What changed in a matter of weeks? Or is this a case of differing opinions, get MR on the phone now...

  • StolenGlory #39 9 months ago

    As good as Mafia II then?

    Joke. JOKE!!!

  • Tryhard #40 9 months ago

    Just to prove how dumb these people are.They let us have an early demo just to see how crap it really was.

  • BonzoBanana #41 9 months ago

    Really enjoyed the demo on 360 but looking at that score and the comments here I'm not buying until a tenner or less. It doesn't sound like it will take that long to get there. Besides a 4hr campaign is rubbish, how can you expect someone to pay close to £40 for 4hrs. For me the single player campaign is 90% of the reason I buy fps games. Looking forward to getting it on the cheap probably just after christmas in the sales.

  • PotatoHeadBobby #42 9 months ago

    Doesn't sound great, but I suspect I'd enjoy it more than the reviewer....

    You know someone's got beef when they criticise achievement titles.

  • username84 #43 9 months ago

    This review hit the nail on the head. After playing the demo I was shocked at how poor it was.

  • SpaceMonkey77 #44 9 months ago

    Oh dear! Guess that's another one to pick up when its cheaper.

    After all the hype and stuff too. Perhaps its also a victim of the changes in the FPS genre. I think Codemasters should focus on making Grid 2, Dirt 4, and Op Flashpoint. They do need new IP, but not another shooter, as its too crowded out there.

    Would be a shame if more jobs were lost, especially since Black Rock just closed up shop.

  • MiY4MOTO #45 9 months ago

    I didn't think the demo was *that* bad. It was quite fun, especially on my 2nd run through... once I'd realised that it was in no way a sequel to Black!

    There was nothing outstanding, but nothing particular broken with it either

  • scuffpuppies #46 9 months ago

    Where as the Driver SF demo was crap it was a terrible misrepresentation of the game, as Driver SF itself is really bloody good.

    Bodycount? I thought it looked to have promise, particularly as the level/environment design felt pretty sold and even great in places. But the actual release? Finished the PS3 version in one sitting, and is now living on the shelf of shame with the other incredibly crap games I'll never play again.

    Game demo's are becoming like movie trailers. Completely untrustworthy. Codemasters? Stick to racing games from now on, and use external developers to work on everything else.

  • kinky_mong #47 9 months ago

    @Douche: Of course it depends on who is reviewing the game, but some of the scores Eurogamer have awarded for average games - Borderlands, Just Cause 2 - make me suprised this scored a 4.

    Never has this picture been more appropriate than replying to your view of Borderlands as "average".

  • Doctor_What #48 9 months ago

    Sadly, Stuart Black probably will be claiming that this happened because he left and his career won't be tarnished.

  • CaptainQuint #49 9 months ago

    Read like a 2 or a 3.

    I wish an EG reviewer would have the balls to score a game according to their words.

  • sonicyoda #50 9 months ago

    I'm having this real issue with FPSs at the moment. There's so many of them and they're so similar that I don't know which ones are supposed to be shit. I played the demo and thought to myself "is this supposed to be good or bad?" I seriously cannot tell anymore.

  • CaptainQuint #51 9 months ago

    Anyway, I'll admit to eating humble pie on this since I've been vocal in the past about the fact I thought it was gonna actually turn out pretty good.

    Doesn't mean I won't be renting it, though.

  • KDR_11k #52 9 months ago

    I'd argue that the F2P MMORPG is slightly more over-saturated but the FPS is a close second.

  • Zebula77 #53 9 months ago

    Judging by the demo, I thought this was gonna be a PSN/Xbox Live title. Oh, well.

  • Pehmu #54 9 months ago

    The demo wasn't that awful, though it wasn't good either. The demo gave the impression the biggest problem were the controls. I don't mind Bodycount marrying iron sights with cover system, but what truly bothered me was its heavy and slow aiming. No matter how much I tweaked aiming speed, it felt too sluggish. Which brings up a question: Why does Bodycount have a melee button? With these heavy controls I would never purposely get even near the enemy.

    Blowing crap up felt quite good though so I might give Bodycount a whirl when the price tag says 10€.

  • acmilan1899 #55 9 months ago

    Looks amazing - got to get this!

  • Badassbab #56 9 months ago

    Thought the graphics were shocking. Not only did it look poor but it had crappy effects and screen tear.

  • Badassbab #57 9 months ago

    Thank goodness for Lovefilm. Pay a tenner a month and rent a game at a time, send it back when you want.

  • superfurry #58 9 months ago

    Is it just me or does the artwork on the front page leading to this review look like something from Brink?

  • Alf-Life #59 9 months ago

    Ouch.

    (So as good as Mafia 2, then?) :p

  • intpleeus #60 9 months ago

    Sometimes you can know everything worth knowing about a game just by its title. "Bodycount" ... seriously? It looks like it was designed by a bunch of 14 year old boys.

  • 32768Colours #61 9 months ago

    Well I played the demo, thought it looked nice initially but soon discovered that its one of the small handful of fps games that causes me motion sickness. So I wasn't going to buy it for that reason alone.

    However, knowing that I'm not missing much is something of a relief; having to stop playing Half Life 2 after it gave me motion sickness was, on the other hand, one of the most depressing moments in my gaming life.

  • aidey6 #62 9 months ago

    We should have recognised the alarm bells with the Lead Director bailing and it being released in August, well away from Battlefield3 and Call of Duty MW3. Thanks Eurogamer for saving me some bandwidth in that I will not be bothering with the 1Gb plus demo.

    Good games can be released in August though ie Batman AA, clearly this isn't one of them, unfortunately

  • arcam #63 9 months ago

    @32768Colours

    Have you tried adjusting the FOV? That can normally fix motion sickness problems.

  • Azhrarn #64 9 months ago

    I always wonder what the developers were thinking.
    How is it possible something like this gets released?
    How is it possible that they produce trash like this?
    They are not inexperienced noobs, are they?

  • Lord_Gremlin #65 9 months ago

    After playing the demo nobody should be surprised.

  • bloodflowers #66 9 months ago

    Disappointing - I pre-ordered this as the demo was so much fun :/

  • Super_Zee #67 9 months ago

    4/10 seems too high considering that "Bodycount...serves nobody - player, developer or publisher." The review tears apart every section of the game, so where are those points actually coming from?

  • Kropotkin #68 9 months ago

    Low praise indeed. One simply cannot afford to make mediocre shooters these days, yet Codemasters has managed to pull one out of the bag yet again. Does anyone remember Turning Point? Yeah, that was a Codemasters game too...

  • chrisjm #69 9 months ago

    Shoddycount

  • BigDaddy82 #70 9 months ago

    Codemasters didn't make turning point they just published it

  • DrStrangelove #71 9 months ago

    Surprising? The name alone had my alarm bells ringing.

  • Grayvern #72 9 months ago

    Add this to the headshots are ruining games list.

  • jstar #73 9 months ago

    Quite frankly Rich, If you have reached the point where you are criticising the names of achievements then you're playing too many computer games and should get a fucking life.

  • drhickman1983 #74 9 months ago

    After playing the demo I'm not suprised at the score. To be fair, the demo wasn't awful, there are worse FPS games out there. But it was distinctly average, and in a heavilyr saturated market being average isn't good enough.

    A shame really, there are some nice things about the game. I quite liked the design aesthetic, the colours seem more vibrant than many FPS games. And I like the idea of the cover mechanics, though the implemenation was off. But it's not enough.

  • AdamAsunder #75 9 months ago

    Saw this coming a mile off, the trailers looked awful.

  • JHo #76 9 months ago

    @Douche,

    There is nothing average about Just Cause2. One of the best games of the last few years. No, seriously.

  • JamieR #77 9 months ago

    I really enjoyed the demo had nice controls and some of the best graphics, will wait for this one to go cheap though since it really has some big issues.

  • AOFanboi #78 9 months ago

    huhuhuh. Boredomcount.

  • CodeBastards #79 9 months ago

    Hate Self.

  • the_black_xino #80 9 months ago

    I sort of enjoyed the demo, i just love the gun blazing and it deeply reminded me of playing Black again and just going guns blazing in FPSers.

    But the bad game designing and terrible control response just ruined the experience for me.

    Oh my GOD i love that sound effects that plays everytime you fire the gun...so f**ng badass!

    I just couldn't finish the demo cuz I kept dying due to bad control sensitive (even though I changed it to my preferences).
    And the bad game designing, such as no physical feedback everytime you get hit. You hear a sound fx that plays when you are close to dying. The control settings were wrongly mapped and the cover mechanic was not done right.

    I dunno, I put the difficulty to normal settings, unless that's way too hard:/

    I was hoping that the demo was an old build for the game:/

    This game is a straight up rent.

  • Darren #81 9 months ago

    The demo was utter cack so I'm not surprised at that review or the score at all. It seems like another one of those nondescript by-the-numbers rubbishy FPS that threatens to put me off the genre for good!

  • Walkerj #82 9 months ago

    The destruction is excellent, it's the games only good point. battlefields destruction is not excellent at all. explosions knock predetermined chunks out of walls in battlefeild...thats 2 states...not destruction.

    In bodycount when you damage a wall pieces fly off where you shoot, you can chip a wall down, but if you are running at a damaged wall, that isnt quite destroyed, your character adds a little extra umph and breaks through the wall with his body.

    I agree that the game is aweful, but the destruction system is considerably better than most.

  • stryker1121 #83 9 months ago

    Pottycount? Work with me here, people.

    Isn't this the dev who said he was inspired by Lady Gaga? Google it..

  • Douche #84 9 months ago

    @kinky_mong

    Ha ha nice pic. Couldn't get into Borderlands - only thought it was any good when i played co-op. I found the whole levelling up thing a bit tedious - at times having to shoot a rat thing or a bloke twenty times with a shotgun because i wasn't a cetain level.

  • abot #85 9 months ago

    At first I thought maybe a rental but with all of the great games coming out in the next couple of weeks I think I'll pass. To little time too many games to play.


  • 32768Colours #86 9 months ago

    @arcam

    Thanks arcam, that's really helpful actually! Is there any way to do that on games consoles or is it just a PC thing? I had The Orange Box on 360, but I could always buy it on PC if not. It has to be worth a try! :)

  • Collymilad #87 9 months ago

    I'm surprised it even got 4 after the demo.

    Terrible.

  • Freek #88 9 months ago

    I wonder if we'll ever know what actaully went on behind the scens of this one. My gesue is: budget cutt, producer with vission leaves, Codemasters says: "well, just push it out as soon as possible, to see if we can make atealst a little money back."

    Because the original idea sounded great: Black 2 in everything but name.

  • UKGN_Zoidberg #89 9 months ago

    4/10 suggests that this is as poor as something like Turning Point or Turok. It's actually just as enjoyable as the likes of Wolfenstein. More like a 7 for me.

  • Jorendo #90 9 months ago

    Sorry but how was it a surprise that this game wouldn't be that good? Did you all, including the reviewer, missed the trailers and the E3 presentations? It never ever looked impressive gameplay wise. It only looked like another generic shooter, and not even a fun one.

    I mean damn boys...the competition is killing on the FPS market. How do you want to compete with CoD (not a big fan of it), Battlefield, Rage later this year, Borderlands, etc. when you make a shooter that can't even succeed to look great in trailers. Hell even Blacksite area 51 that got low grades succeeded to look impressive and have a awesome demo.

    But seriously Rich, how was it a surprise to you it would suck? I know you guys may not say if a game is epic fail before you review it (yet for some reason you are allowed to hype a game even when it sucks...Kane and Lynch anyone?). But atleast you don't have to pretend you didn't know it was gonna suck when you where writing your review.

  • BigDaddy82 #91 9 months ago

    Yeah this game isn't actually that bad, it's a nice quick one for achievements anyway. Shame they repeat some of the levels quite a lot and it's quite short anyway, there's also some bad design decisions in there but its entertaining enough for a weekend, i'd give it a 6 or a 7