Jump to navigation

Table of contents

Page Previous 1 2 3 Next

Advertisement

Enemy Territory: Quake Wars Review

Xbox 360 PlayStation 3 Review by Kristan Reed

4 June, 2008

Page 3 of 3. <- Page 2

Where the game fares better is the destructibility of all the vehicle units and deployable artillery, which have been lovingly rendered in a way that's at odds with their vanilla surroundings. These are not only varied in terms of utility, but blessed with a satisfying degree of destructibility, which goes a long way to adding to the game's chaotic ambience.

The biggest question mark we have though is whether there's enough variety to justify positioning this at full price. With just 12 medium-sized maps to flit through and precious little variety in them, the biggest fly in the ointment is a massive amount of repetition and a questionable lack of different modes and customisation options. Unlike so many multiplayer shooters, Quake Wars appears content to merely offer a single, objective-based gameplay mode, where you're either defending or attacking. The main problem is that you tend to find yourself performing the same old tasks, involving generators, bridges, mining lasers, and getting (or preventing) key vehicles reaching to their destination. Sure, the option to switch between the Strogg and GDI and explore the nuances of the unique abilities of the five different classes can put a different spin on the gameplay, but in no time the repetition of the tasks within the maps can't help but chip away at your enthusiasm.

It's always a risk for publishers to try and sell a game based entirely on its multiplayer mode when so many great single-player games ship with a fully fledged online component. If Quake Wars' online offering boasted a richly varied and well-realised experience, you wouldn't even comment on the absence of a convincing single-player mode - but that's plainly not the case. Calling a sequence of bot-matches over all the game's 12 levels a "Campaign" is optimistic, and smacks of "will this do?" To replicate the whole thing with limited customisation options and then call it "Instant Action" is worse. The third mode, Stopwatch, is, again, identical to the main objective-based Campaign mode, only you have to play as GDI in one round, and then play the same map from the Strogg perspective. That all three almost identical gameplay modes exist isn't so much the issue, as the baffling lack of imagination to do anything else with these maps.

'Enemy Territory: Quake Wars' Screenshot 3

Anyone fancy a Strogg fancy dress party? I want a suit like that.

It definitely helps that the game's bots are excellent, but that's no substitute for a compelling online experience. With frame-rate issues already dragging down the offline game at times, the moment the same thing happens online, it's lag central. Once in a while you can probably tolerate it, but when missions involve getting tanks from A to B, and you're being shelled to kingdom come, the whole thing nearly grinds to a halt. Not good. In simple terms, some of the objectives within each map just aren't optimised for online play, and for a game which relies almost entirely on its online prowess, that's a big no-no.

That said, Enemy Territory: Quake Wars is by no means a shoddy product. Despite struggling to make a good first impression, it's one of those games that you find yourself getting more out of the more you invest into it, and hides a surprising amount of depth. The biggest question mark is whether a big enough online community will spring up around it to allow it to fulfill its potential. Sadly, with a fair amount of optimisation issues rearing their heads early on, Quake Wars looks destined to line-up with the also-rans in the online shooter stakes.

6/10

Read our Scoring Policy

Advertisement

Are you excited about Enemy Territory: Quake Wars on Xbox 360?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

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

Comments: 1-50 of 54 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
stoopidgreg
04/06/08 @ 12:03
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
expected outcome.
kj66246
04/06/08 @ 12:09
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I will be sticking with Warhawk then...

May dip into the bargain bucket a little later in the year.
Mudo
04/06/08 @ 12:09
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I honestly don't understand why reviews need to be so long. There must be nearly 2000 words there. That's ridiculous for a review - for any game.
You could easily condense it to just one page.
strelok
04/06/08 @ 12:10
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
so who gives a shit about FPS's on consoles anyway? ^^
stoopidgreg
04/06/08 @ 12:12
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
mudo - you can cut the review drastically if you just skip to the score.
Mudo
04/06/08 @ 12:13
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Yes, but I'm not massive fan of scores and it avoids the issue. :(
Xerx3s
04/06/08 @ 12:16
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Get frontlines instead. Much better game.
Darren
04/06/08 @ 12:18
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's much better on the PC... and cheaper! ;)

360 owners would be far better off waiting for Unreal Tournament III, which has more maps and game modes, plus a (kind of) single player campaign. It was also bloody marvellous on the PS3 so I'd guess at the 360 version being possibly slightly better (minus the mods).
UncleLou
04/06/08 @ 12:18
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Hardly an "issue", more of a personal preference. I like longer reviews. It's not like there is a shortage of sites with short reviews (1Up, for example).
absolutezero
04/06/08 @ 12:19
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So will you ever be able to have a look at the PS3 version? According to a comparison on Gametrailers theres different interfaces for choosing troops and interior cockpit views that are'nt available in the 360 copy.
caligari
04/06/08 @ 12:20
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Not as good as UT 3, then.
Mudo
04/06/08 @ 12:20
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Fair enough UncleLou, you're right.
Eighthours
04/06/08 @ 12:22
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I honestly don't understand why reviews need to be so long. There must be nearly 2000 words there. That's ridiculous for a review - for any game.
You could easily condense it to just one page.


Give Kristan's mortgage a chance, fella!
SBfistfun
04/06/08 @ 12:23
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
bah was hoping it would be good, but online + dodgy framerates = forget it
vegard
04/06/08 @ 12:24
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
DYING FETUS!!!
bdc
04/06/08 @ 12:27
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Eurogamer is known for good indepth reviews, that's why its audience visits it.
Dogstar060763
04/06/08 @ 12:29
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Frontlines: Fuel of War is basically an identical game, but much better in just about every possible way. ET:QW is a real disappointment. I'll never understand how Nerve just couldn't get a handle on the game engine (it's based on an enhanced version of the Doom3 game engine, fer chrissakes, and that would make it well over 3 years old) and optimise it properly for 360. It's a bit of a mess and, imo, unacceptable.

Ah well. Time to wait for this to show up in the bargain bin...
DcP729UK
04/06/08 @ 12:33
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
whatever happend to Quake > UT?! o_O
Chufty
04/06/08 @ 12:41
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Just get it on the PC, where quake games belong.
strelok
04/06/08 @ 12:56
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
QW:ET on PC was the best multiplayer FPS game last year (yeah, > CoD4, > TF2 and > UT3).
'nuff said.
BiscuitBase
04/06/08 @ 13:02
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So not as bad as Haze then?
hahayou
04/06/08 @ 13:58
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Actions are context-sensitive on the (patched) PC version too, and it also has a tutorial.

It's a decent game but not nearly as fun as TF2. A game about the Earth being invaded by cyberzombaliens who want to blenderise and consume humanity also shouldn't be quite so bland... still, sneaking up on an enemy squad and going crazy with a shotgun can't go wrong.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 04/06/08 @ 15:03
MrMarc
04/06/08 @ 13:59
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
What really annoys me is how in the review this keeps getting referred to as a Quake game, which it absolutely is not. I can imagine alot of people instantly badmouthing this because it's not a run and gun deathmatch game as they would (blindly) expect.

It's an Enemy Territory game. See how Wolfenstein: ET plays and then come back to this, Quake is merely the setting, there is minimal influence from any Quake game in this when it comes down to the nitty gritty. Fantastic game on the PC, would hope it's still just as enjoyable on the 360, may give it a bash sometime.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 04/06/08 @ 15:00
Bad Devotions
04/06/08 @ 14:06
#24
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Pfft this is nowhere near the brownest game ever.

mmm brown


LOL +1

krudster [mod]
04/06/08 @ 14:21
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If it's not anything to do with Quake, don't use the brand name to sell it.
AtomicBanana
04/06/08 @ 14:23
#26
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Well said MrMarc,

While I agree with the overall score and the rest of the review, Its' not *meant* to be like quake 3 etc, and never, ever was supposed to be.
Moonprince
04/06/08 @ 14:29
#27
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Eurogamer is known for good indepth reviews, that's why its audience visits it.

Joke post?
miiiguel
04/06/08 @ 14:35
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
nice review krudster. however it lacks a bit of charisma, which I think might be a result of the post-MGS loony attacks on EG. get back to personal aproaches and passion that you geneticaly have.
insane_cobra
04/06/08 @ 14:35
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"So will you ever be able to have a look at the PS3 version? According to a comparison on Gametrailers theres different interfaces for choosing troops and interior cockpit views that are'nt available in the 360 copy."

According to IGN, the PS3 version indeed has some features not found in the Xbox 360 game, but looks and runs even worse. Not that it matters much, both versions seem to be quite lousy ports.
Eraser
04/06/08 @ 14:36
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
so is this game rated based on how it stands on it's own, or how it compares to it's PC counterpart? The latter happends far too much. Games are given lower scores because they're exactly the same as they were on another system, 6 monhts ago. Shouldn't it work the other way around, like, when a game is re-released with extra's and additional content, that should only boost it's score, not give lower scores because it has the same content?

Not saying that's the case with this review here, but it's still a sore point IMO.
Laika
04/06/08 @ 14:40
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
GDI? I think you mean GDF...

Quake not C&C :P
Krelle
04/06/08 @ 15:13
#32
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Krudster:

Thats a rather lame argument coming from you Krudster.
Halo Wars wont be an FPS.
Also, FFCC My life as a king aint got battles. More of a HarvestMoon-ish game.
They both DO use the setting of said IPs thou. Just a heads-up, man.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 04/06/08 @ 16:14
Carlo
04/06/08 @ 15:45
#33
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Opps!
andromeda
04/06/08 @ 16:42
#34
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
the guy in the illustration on the front page looks like nicholas cage
krudster [mod]
04/06/08 @ 16:56
#35
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It's a first person shooter using the Quake brand. I think it's only to be expected that the Quake 'feel' was present somewhere. I really didn't 'go on' about it during the review, merely pointed it out as a point of interest to any Quake fans expecting it to be similiar. If anything I defended it not being like Quake.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 04/06/08 @ 17:57
Krelle
04/06/08 @ 17:14
#36
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@krudster
Yay! Better response, this.
Unlike the other one which you probably dont even agree with yourself. (How could you, its downright wrong (right).)

move along, now..
Edited 1 times, most recently on 04/06/08 @ 18:14
Machetazo
04/06/08 @ 17:33
#37
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The review brings Conker: Live & Reloaded, multi over Xbox Live to mind, in comparison...
Edited 1 times, most recently on 04/06/08 @ 18:34
BrokenSymmetry
04/06/08 @ 17:47
#38
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Although in this review the removal of the "side-missions" was called "streamlined", I though it was a loss to the game. When I first played the PC version, those side-missions felt like the biggest innovation of the game, in that they always gave each class a few clear objectives to do that work for the team as a whole.
Ryuken
04/06/08 @ 17:55
#39
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"It's much better on the PC... and cheaper! ;) "

Aye, have seen it for €20 or so at retail shops, great bargain and a decent/well supported game if you liked Enemy Territory. It doesn't really try much to be as frenetic as other Quake-games idd , although I have to say this is still one of the most actiony classbased shooters out there.
suicida
04/06/08 @ 18:11
#40
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I've been playing this since Friday and think it's really good. Not interested in playing against randoms but me and my friends have been having a right laugh playing against the bots.
Ronan_Crawford
04/06/08 @ 19:16
#41
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
had a go preferred. Its good fun along as your with the right group of people. I might have have to trade this in though for NG2.
Buran
04/06/08 @ 21:18
#42
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
As some of the writers above says, this game in PC is one of the BEST mp fps EVEN developed, near to BF2 in enjoyment (at lest for me):

But in PS3 i like a lot more UT III: K+M support, better graphics and much better stability; also the gameplay and pace is 5 times faster in UT III.

Both games are great in PC, but in consoles UT III is much better choice.
wonton
05/06/08 @ 06:37
#43
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ive put in about 50 hours into the PC version and reached Ensign rank. And my conclusion is that quake wars is good but will not have the legacy of Wolfenstein ET.

Don't get me wrong, ET:QW is a fun game to play on public servers but only if you spend the hours to find the intricacies. And thats the thing, the barrier to entry to enjoy this at its best (when other good players on the server, when teams are balanced, when you are competent yourself is quite high.) Although i have played this more than than TF2, i have to admit i found TF2 more fun.

The technical problems surrounding the console versions won't help (apparently the x360 version relies on p2p for online play). I personally found the graphics on the PC version unimpressive and the art style doesn't help. Like the review says, the environments are quite boring. There's alot of game play in each map but no wonder people want new maps when the stock maps visually bore you to tears. We need something exciting! Something out of the ordinary, not gritty realism in a game which sometimes boring (especially when none of the players are bothered to get organized).

Splash damage have done a good job with initial PC game and I hope as much as possible translates to the console versions. Nevertheless Splash Damage have released what is very likely to be the last patch for the PC version (1.5) and are most likely working on their next game, I hope for there next project they will learn some subtle lessons from this game and remind themselves of some of the incredible things they achieved the (gameplay wise and stylistically near-perfect) Wolf ET.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 05/06/08 @ 07:39
Br0ken_Engli5h
05/06/08 @ 10:13
#44
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I want to love this game, but the absolutely appalling lag kills it for me.
It's TF2 syndrome all over again, but I'm not willing to hold on to it until it either gets patched or people start recognising their limits as far as hosting is concerned.

Such a shame
Lemming81
05/06/08 @ 10:17
#45
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"If it's not anything to do with Quake, don't use the brand name to sell it."

It's got everything to do with Quake. It's set before Quake 2. It's the Strogg attack on Earth that kick starts the retaliation.

If on the other hand you are some die-hard Quake 1 fan, then tough shit - three quake games about the same storyline cancels out the one Lovecraftian oddity.
zippie151
05/06/08 @ 10:46
#46
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
How come PS3 versions are hardly ever reviewed?

On topic, was an expected outcome really, did anyone think this would actually be a great game??
strelok
05/06/08 @ 11:51
#47
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
no, ofc. FPSs on the consoles are a joke.
still, it is an awesome game on the PC.
mk-1601
05/06/08 @ 11:56
#48
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"In one of the more useful tweaks to the console versions, tasks such as bomb-planting, hacking and repairing are now context-sensitive actions, meaning that you can simply walk up to the item and press X rather than having to cycle through your inventory to find a specific tool as you had to on the PC."

No, the PC version has always had this. You got this wrong in the preview as well.

"Medium-sized maps"? They're what, a couple of kilometres across? I'm struggling to think of another multiplayer console FPS with maps of similar scale.

Once again we see the oh-so-hilarious "brown" comments, clearly something you can't help yourself from falling back on in a review of an Id game regardless of whether they're applicable. The environments frequently looked picture-postcard gorgeous on the PC version, so either they've downgraded the visuals massively for the consoles or this is just sneering.

The complaint about lack of gameplay variety is just as baffling. Twelve maps with a distinct set of strategic options for each team, for each objective. Even if you lack any imagination and just stick to the objective class and make a beeline for the target (which I love to do), the skill level and strategy of the opposing team introduces a wide variance even for the simpler objectives. I expect this is just a spin on the typical "you just shoot things...sigh" ennui with which EG reviews all FPS games rather than an criticism based on the content of the game itself.

I expect there is enough wrong with the console port to warrant the score, but these criticisms of the core game are grossly unfair if not flat-out wrong.
krudster [mod]
05/06/08 @ 13:10
#49
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
- The PC version was patched to include context sensitive actions - something I wasn't aware of.

- It is exceptionally brown, get over it, and it's far from picture postcard gorgeous on 360.

- The maps really aren't that big or small. Hence 'medium'.

- The gameplay variety comment is based on the recycling of objectives between maps. It's the same three or four objectives recycled over 12 maps, with the odd one off thrown in.

- I mentioned variety based on switching classes, I don't get your point.

- If you think the criticisms are unfair based on the console port, go ahead and play it and find out. This isn't reviewing the PC game.
strelok
05/06/08 @ 13:20
#50
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
so, just to make this point clear, does TF2 have gameplay variety?

Comments: 1-50 of 54 in total | next 50 »

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

X View gallery