Jump to navigation

Table of contents

Page Previous 1 2 Next

Advertisement

Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway Review

Xbox 360 PC PlayStation 3 Review by Kristan Reed

23 September, 2008

Page 1 of 2. Page 2 ->

Brothers In Arms' first appearance in early 2005 was a shot in the arm for the battle-weary World War II genre. By putting a first-person spin on Full Spectrum Warrior's excellent 'cover and suppress' gameplay, it helped steer the genre in a more intelligent, strategic direction. Within each level were, essentially, a bunch of set-piece puzzles to solve: you'd face clusters of entrenched enemies and have to try and suss out ways in which to pick them off through cunning squad placement, and a mixture of suppression and flanking tactics. Running headlong towards the enemy was a one-way ticket to death.

This strategy-lite was hugely satisfying, but, by necessity, slowed the pace down to a crawl compared to the more cinematically-minded and gung-ho shooters. This amped up the tension, and made the action feel more like a gritty war of attrition than one man's Rambo charge down a corridor. Dialling down of the run-and-gun aspect meant there was generally a better sense of squad unity, and Gearbox took full advantage by zoning in on the trials that individual characters faced, as well as a greater emphasis on authentically recreating the real-life settings.

It wasn't for everyone, evidently, and was a little repetitive over the whole campaign - even more so if you happened to play the quick-fire sequel, Earned In Blood, which came out just seven months later. That we've had to wait almost three years for the third in the series is definitely a Good Thing in our book. Putting the franchise out to pasture for a while (by accident or design - you choose) has, in theory, given Gearbox ample time in which to reinvigorate the brand and build on the many good ideas, while giving fans a chance to recharge their enthusiasm for another merry round of Axis slaughter.

'Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway' Screenshot 1

This had been a poorly planned stag party, especially considering their choice of attire and warzone.

On paper, you can't argue with all the new features. The 'Big Thing' for Hell's Highway is without doubt destructible cover. It's not simply about suppressing the enemy anymore, it's about identifying weaknesses in their cover points and taking maximum advantage. If your enemy is behind a metal barricade, tough luck, but if they're stupid enough to think that a rickety wooden fence or a pile of sandbags are going to provide adequate cover, tell the men with bazookas to rain death down upon it and see just how long it lasts.

With this extra layer of strategy built in to the game, it's no longer a case of getting your squad to suppress while you merrily outflank them. It's evident right from the word go that Gearbox has expanded the battlefields sufficiently that you're almost always outnumbered. While you might have two or three squadrons of men to position around the environment, the chances are you'll be facing maybe five or six pockets of enemies. You really have to consider your priorities a lot more. Generally, you might figure out the weak links first, destroy their cover, pick off the stragglers, and then when the odds have been evened out, suppress the enemies which give you, Sgt. Matt Baker, the chance to slip in down the flanks and pick enemies off when you've got an appropriate angle.

'Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway' Screenshot 2

Once you've tenderly cupped a squadmate's bazooka, there's no turning back.

Initially, at least, directing the battlefield via the joypad feels a little counterintuitive with the default control mapping. Little things trip you up, like the way that aiming down your sights is mapped to a click on the right stick, rather than on the left trigger like you expect. But with a little persistence, it's easy to see why Gearbox chose to do so, with the emphasis on making the squad management system as easy as possible. If it really bothers you, however, there are a further four control mappings available - one of which (amusingly called Tour of Duty) allows you to use the left trigger/L2 to use the line-of-sight/zoom function. In common with Ubi-published military titles like Rainbow Six and GRAW, issuing squad commands is simple and intuitive. You hold down the left trigger to bring up a circular indicator and guide it with the left stick over the enemy to issue an attack order, or to a cover point to get them to move. Actions are frequently context-sensitive, so if it's possible for your squad to lob a grenade, the icon will change on the fly to reflect that. Likewise, if you have a bazooka squad and can feasibly destroy their cover, you'll see immediately if it's possible. Issuing the order is as simple as letting go of the left trigger.

If, however, you want to cancel the order, pressing the right trigger gets rid of the order reticule entirely. It takes a bit of getting used to, and you'll frequently issue orders in error (usually by ham-fistedly hitting the left trigger and sending your men blindly off into a hail of hot lead), but once you re-wire your gaming habits, it's a decent system which works well on the pad. With further options to switch between squad types (such as assault and bazooka teams), and an option for one or all of your teams to fall-in behind you, it's flexible without ever feeling overly convoluted.

At its core, the gameplay remains largely unaltered. It's still very much a case of training suppression fire in the right places, and keeping a close eye on the pie-chart indicators that appear above the heads of each group of enemy. The more red that appears in the pie-chart, the less suppressed they are, and hence the more dangerous they become. If the circle is entirely blue, however, it's possible to run towards them in almost complete safety.

To Page 2 ->

Advertisement

Are you excited about Brothers In Arms: Hell's Highway on PlayStation 3/Xbox 360/PC?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-50 of 58 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
lambtron
23/09/08 @ 16:38
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It looked utterly utterly boring in the preview videos.

The worst thing a game can be.
FWB
23/09/08 @ 16:44
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The idea really appeals to me and having played the originals I do quite like the approach to the FPS genre, but it does get very repetitive. This looks like nothing has changed, except for better graphics and a bazooka team. They really need to be moving towards a FPS version of CoH.

No mortars to control?
Edited 1 times, most recently on 23/09/08 @ 17:58
krudster [mod]
23/09/08 @ 16:50
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
No mortars, no.
BravoGolf
23/09/08 @ 16:53
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Wow, I remember seeing the original E3 videos and being super excited about this
Triggerhappytel
23/09/08 @ 16:53
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
This review sounds like a strong arguement for .5 decimals in reviews - really reads like a 6.5.

Anyway, a bit of a shame, but not exactly surprising.
FWB
23/09/08 @ 16:56
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Bazooka over mortars = lazy programming.
kelly's_h
23/09/08 @ 16:58
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I was super exited too. A little disappointed but think I will still give it a try some time. But to be perfectly honest it's the gore that caught my eye.
supanova
23/09/08 @ 16:59
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
can you call in artillery support?
supanova
23/09/08 @ 17:02
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I recall BIA road to hill 30 getting 7/10 in the Edge on the xbox. I really enjoyed that game, played it a couple of months ago and still enjoyed the game-play. I'd like to play this through and get my own perspective.
krudster [mod]
23/09/08 @ 17:04
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The gore isn't actually that gory at all. The headshots and accompanying slo-mo are pretty cool the first few times, but inevitably the novelty quickly wears off - all you actually see is a sort of red squishiness, rather than any horrific damage modeling. That's probably a good thing.
niteninja
23/09/08 @ 17:10
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
BIA has never been a run and gun shooter which probably doesnt appeal to arcade shooter fans.
I always enjoyed the tactical shooters like rainbow,graw,hidden and dangerous and farcry.
Much better than call of duty.
Gazza_UK
23/09/08 @ 17:11
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
a perfect " meh " game then, never was my cup of tea really
BravoGolf
23/09/08 @ 17:12
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Good review, by the way, very to the point
mem
23/09/08 @ 17:16
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
i was waiting on this review and eurogamer allways gets it right.another words dont expect nothing new .looks like i will be renting this one before blowing my cash as ther are so many good games coming out.like Call Of Duty: World At War.cant wait for this .......
makeamazing
23/09/08 @ 21:28
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Getting it on the PC, which this kind of game always has the edge on PC than the console imho. Not surprised its not a major difference to the previous games. Im sure i will enjoy it.
demian08
23/09/08 @ 22:10
#16
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The game is critisized for having repetitive mechanics? There is not a single great game which is not built solely on repetitive mechanics; super mario, halo, ico. Games by nature consist of a set of consistent laws; you can critisize these laws of being fundamentaly flawed, but not of being used repetitively.

I find the level of intelligence of the reviewers working for popular sites like this, ign, gametrailers and gamespot, to name a few, quite astonishing.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 23/09/08 @ 23:14
Binglybob
23/09/08 @ 22:14
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Disappointing - I was hoping for a nostalgic WWII shooter-fest to reignite my passion for the genre, which was dashed by Call of Duty 3. Nevermind, Ł40 saved. Anyone else think the RRP for all new games should be Ł30 in light of the credit crunch?

I really have not fully enjoyed a WWII as much since Medal of Honor Underground on the PSone. That really was epic.

Bring on Wipeout HD and LBP. Everything else is irrelevant.
Edited 2 times, most recently on 23/09/08 @ 23:17
Obiwanshinobi
23/09/08 @ 22:24
#18
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The game is critisized for having repetitive mechanics? There is not a single great game which is not built solely on repetitive mechanics; super mario, halo, ico.
Didn't play Jak II, did you? Not to mention WarioWare.
subtlesnake
23/09/08 @ 23:27
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"The game is critisized for having repetitive mechanics? There is not a single great game which is not built solely on repetitive mechanics; super mario, halo, ico. Games by nature consist of a set of consistent laws; you can critisize these laws of being fundamentaly flawed, but not of being used repetitively. "

So your argument is that because some level of repetition is inevitable - even expected, you can never criticise a game for lacking in variation? Would it be such a big stretch to suggest that games must successfully balance established mechanics (i.e the familiar) with new and interesting design twists (i.e what is fresh and exciting), and that maybe, just maybe, BiA:HH gets this balance wrong?

"don't ever waste your time and intelligence on a EG review, just tell the reviewer what an idiot he is. It's simpler and easier that way."

Yes, that really tells him exactly what he did wrong.
WJF
23/09/08 @ 23:46
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
A lot of games have repetitive mechanics, but the good ones develop them as the game goes on - use them in interesting ways, make the player think, mix it up (I'm running out of cack phrases...). A really old and cheap example from the FPS genre was removing all your weapons 3/4's of the way through and putting you up against the same foes as when you had loadsabullets, creating a new challenge. That's 'mixing it up' (In a cliched and lazy way, sure). Mario introduced turtles with spikes on their backs. There's another. See? Easy.

I get the feeling from this review (quite possibly from the words) that after the tutorial - that's it. It's just the same thing for a couple of hours with nothing new to challenge the player.

David_Snakes
24/09/08 @ 00:50
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Yeah, Krudster, I won't waste my time with you and your shitty review. You're an idiot!

So dude, there's gore and shit in this game. Must buy.
RazorObsession
24/09/08 @ 02:16
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
well if i see it cheap somewhere, whilst i'm waiting for the triple F week to arrive, i might give it a blast.
(thats Fable 2, Fallout 3 and Farcry 2 all in one goddamn week)
makeamazing
24/09/08 @ 06:24
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Yes worth buying just to make time fly waiting for Farcry and Fallout...
OllyJ
24/09/08 @ 06:54
#24
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Nothing about the rather impressive audio AT ALL?

Why do reviewers never ever mention it!!!!
aldo_14
24/09/08 @ 06:57
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The game is critisized for having repetitive mechanics? There is not a single great game which is not built solely on repetitive mechanics; super mario, halo, ico. Games by nature consist of a set of consistent laws; you can critisize these laws of being fundamentaly flawed, but not of being used repetitively.

I think you're a wee bit confused here between what is mechanics and what is, for lack of a better term, 'laws'. Actions and constraints upon the player can be more or less constant, but it's the mechanics - the interaction of the two required to play - that need to vary to remain fresh.

The repetition of mechanics in the review pretty clearly refers to the game requiring reuse of the same strategy without enforced improvisation or modification throughout the game, with the only gameplay variety coming (tenuously) through scenery changes.

Insulting someones intelligence is the first resort of the stupid person, IMO.






( ;-) )
BurningR
24/09/08 @ 07:55
#26
-1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"You can predictably and reliably know that as long as the screen isn't too red, you're OK."

That sounds really boring
PearOfAnguish
24/09/08 @ 08:10
#27
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Oh look, someone has reacted badly to a review of a hyped game because it doesn't get awarded 10/10, and responded by questioning the abilities of the writer. What a surprise.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 24/09/08 @ 09:11
UncleLou
24/09/08 @ 08:19
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
""The game is critisized for having repetitive mechanics? There is not a single great game which is not built solely on repetitive mechanics"

True. But there's a difference between a necessary degree of repetition, and a complete lack of variation. The first BiA already had the same damn "puzzle" repeated again, and again, and again. Even the often criticised Gears of War did a much better job of varying an at least similar idea with varied level design. In BiA, once you had seen one level, you had seen them all.
Darren
24/09/08 @ 09:29
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Loved the first game on the PC, never bothered with the second as it looked far too similar, won't be bothering with this one 'cos I'm pig sick of WWII games and lost interest in this game over a year ago when it suffered delay after delay. Nice that it turned out OK but there's far too many other potentially better games demanding my money in the run up to Christmas...
Darren
24/09/08 @ 09:33
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I noticed this review had a subtle dig at Gears of Wars cinematic but irritating running camera and quite right too... I actually avoided using it because it was so awful and actually restricted my vision, not ideal when you're running between cover under heavy fire. I really hope Epic have addressed this with the sequel, at the very least you should be able to turn it on or off IMO.
HolyJebus
24/09/08 @ 10:07
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ok, I think everyone has burned Demian enough for now.

Kristan, do you think the repetitive nature of the game may not be as frustrating to people who have not played the other games in the series?
krudster [mod]
24/09/08 @ 10:26
#32
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's a subjective thing. What some people find boring and repetitive others find perfectly entertaining. Sure, if you haven't played either of the previous BiAs, then you may be less bothered by this essentially being more of the same. I'm not convinced that'll make it any more desirable, though. Try before you buy if you're not sure.
HolyJebus
24/09/08 @ 10:48
#33
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Cheers, may be one to wait for the bargain bin. I'll wait for the reviews of FarCry to see how it compares.
Fleeby
24/09/08 @ 11:33
#34
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I found the original repetitive and unremarkable. This sounds like more of the same. So thanks for the warning, Krudster.
snafu65
24/09/08 @ 11:37
#35
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So yet another long awaited game turns out to be average,this is getting depressing.
bodypopper
24/09/08 @ 11:42
#36
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Sounds like they should have bunged out another game/'mission pack' on the Xbox 1 instead and moved on to something else.
Still optimistic about the new Aliens game though.
PearOfAnguish
24/09/08 @ 11:46
#37
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Try before you buy if you're not sure.

EG in condoning piracy shocker.
Godz_Mercenary
24/09/08 @ 11:52
#38
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The personal insults on the reviewer are pathetic. Grow up.
glaeken
24/09/08 @ 12:06
#39
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I don't actually mind all these average games turning up recently. It will mean I have plenty to pick over in the bargin bins during the next games drought.
n3utr0n
24/09/08 @ 12:30
#40
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Another one to rent then. Somehow enjoyed The Force Unleashed a lot more knowing I didn't blow 60 quid on it.
spookyzombie
24/09/08 @ 13:29
#41
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'm playing through this now and it's enjoyable. It's certainly not another average FPS. A 7/10 is about right.

Klinjon
24/09/08 @ 14:02
#42
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Demian 08 - "The game is critisized for having repetitive mechanics? There is not a single great game which is not built solely on repetitive mechanics; super mario, halo, ico. Games by nature consist of a set of consistent laws; you can critisize these laws of being fundamentaly flawed, but not of being used repetitively. I find the level of intelligence of the reviewers working for popular sites like this, ign, gametrailers and gamespot, to name a few, quite astonishing."

I couldn't agree more. What I find most astonishing is how quick the members of this website have jumped all over your supposedly "insulting" comments by in turn blatantly disregarding your opinion. An ironic twist, I'm sure many of you will agree. Just because someone disagrees with the fundamental nature of a reviewers criticism doesn't mean they think that the writer is an idiot, and neither does (or should) it make their opinion any less valid.

PearOfAnguish - "Oh look, someone has reacted badly to a review of a hyped game because it doesn't get awarded 10/10, and responded by questioning the abilities of the writer. What a surprise."

It's not the score some of us, including myself, are questioning. That has nothing to do with the abilities of the writer, as any tom, dick, or harry can slap a score on a game based on their opinion. The nature of his criticism, in this case the "repetitve mechanics", is what is being questioned here.

mem - "... eurogamer allways gets it right."

If only that were true...

Edited 1 times, most recently on 24/09/08 @ 15:03
UncleLou
24/09/08 @ 14:16
#43
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"I couldn't agree more. What I find most astonishing is how quick the members of this website have jumped all over your supposedly "insulting" comments by in turn blatantly disregarding your opinion."

You don't find the "level of intelligence" comment insulting? Wow.

And you'll find people have responded to his post despite his childish tone.
sneetch
24/09/08 @ 15:21
#44
+1
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Triggerhappytel
"This review sounds like a strong arguement for .5 decimals in reviews - really reads like a 6.5."

6.5? Hah, yeah, 6.5 if you like inaccuracies.

Using my Review-a-tron 2000 (patent pending, designed with 100% real science) I can categorically state that this should be a 6.729816213.
cyber_nicco
24/09/08 @ 15:47
#45
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Hmm, a "7" is called middle-of-the-road by EG. I wonder why there's always so much arguing over scores. Is a 7 average, or is it a 5. Seems like whenever they give a decent game a 5, it is defended as being an average score.

:p
HolyJebus
24/09/08 @ 17:12
#46
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Klinjon

The problem with Demian's post is that by his argument a reviewer can never say that a game is repetitive or else say that every game is repetitive. In games such as Halo/Mario they generally drip feed abilities/weapons/vehicles to the player. Don't give them everything at the start as they will tire of these "mechanics" quicker.

I don't like how often people critise the reviewers here as though they could do a better job themselves. The ideal candidates to review games would of course be previous games designers but the chance of this happening is very slim. The next best are people who play more games then almost anyone else out there. As always if you don't like the site, go elsewhere.
captainrentboy
24/09/08 @ 17:29
#47
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Haven't read the review through yet, but I did play the game in work today for an hour or so, and it was rediculously underwhelming and bland :/
At least I've now only got to buy the one title this weekend, and that would be Pure.
local_celebrity
24/09/08 @ 21:51
#48
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Game aside, this review was so well crafted. Urbane, witty, perceptive -- and not a wasted word in sight.

Kristan, I wish I could write like you, mate.

My heart goes out to poor old Randy. He's been trying to talk this game up for ages now. He'll be crying big, salty tears into his Duff tonight.
FWB
24/09/08 @ 23:06
#49
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Does the AI ever make the attempt to assault your position?
spookyzombie
25/09/08 @ 02:22
#50
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Not really. They move about, but they don't hunt you down. They just tend to reposition themselves behind vaious bits of cover and try to shoot you mainly from distance.

Comments: 1-50 of 58 in total | next 50 »

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

X View gallery