Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway Comments by Kristan Reed

It looked utterly utterly boring in the preview videos.

The worst thing a game can be.

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?

No mortars, no.

Wow, I remember seeing the original E3 videos and being super excited about this

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.

Bazooka over mortars = lazy programming.

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.

can you call in artillery support?

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.

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.

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.

a perfect " meh " game then, never was my cup of tea really

Good review, by the way, very to the point

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.

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.

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, £40 saved. Anyone else think the RRP for all new games should be £30 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.

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.

"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.

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.

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.

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)

Yes worth buying just to make time fly waiting for Farcry and Fallout...

Nothing about the rather impressive audio AT ALL?

Why do reviewers never ever mention it!!!!

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.






( ;-) )

"You can predictably and reliably know that as long as the screen isn't too red, you're OK."

That sounds really boring

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.

""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.

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...

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.

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?

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.

Cheers, may be one to wait for the bargain bin. I'll wait for the reviews of FarCry to see how it compares.

I found the original repetitive and unremarkable. This sounds like more of the same. So thanks for the warning, Krudster.

So yet another long awaited game turns out to be average,this is getting depressing.

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.

Try before you buy if you're not sure.

EG in condoning piracy shocker.

The personal insults on the reviewer are pathetic. Grow up.

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.

Another one to rent then. Somehow enjoyed The Force Unleashed a lot more knowing I didn't blow 60 quid on it.

I'm playing through this now and it's enjoyable. It's certainly not another average FPS. A 7/10 is about right.

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...

"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.

@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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Does the AI ever make the attempt to assault your position?

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.

I haven't tried it yet, as I only started playing this mid-afternoon yesterday, but I'm guessing the unlockable Authentic difficulty will ramp up the AI, much like the higher settings of the original BIA games did.