Field Commander Review

By Matt Martin Published 12 October, 2006

Casualty of war?

Version tested: PSP

We could do a lot of soul searching about whether strategy games work on a console - a handheld console at that. Ask anyone who's gotten cosy with the Advance Wars series - presentation, style, replayability, charm and deep strategic choices make it a beautiful thing. In horrible contrast, those of us who spent time with Aliens versus Predator: Extinction can only cringe at the pain. It left us feeling violated.

Somewhere in the middle sits Field Commander, a decent stab at turn-based strategy in the palm of your hand. The basics are there, and it works, but it struggles to distinguish itself and is hampered by an identity crisis, annoying technical issues and a general lack of tension. Maybe it is the nature of the genre clashing with the format, or maybe it's just not special enough. But who wants above average games that never reach greatness?

From a distance it looks like there's going to be some realism, or at least a realistic atmosphere to help create tension. But up close - and there's nothing closer than squinting at a screen you're holding inches from your face - the graphical style is too muddled. The perspective of the troops on the battlefield, the icons and the size of the PSP, all render units cute and tubby instead of detailed and deadly. It's not necessarily crippling to gameplay, but by not sticking to a particular style it gives the impression of being muddled. Imagine a tough-talking general barking his orders with a lollipop hanging from the side of his gob rather than a cigar. These soldiers need the hairdryer treatment from a drill sergeant about the state of their appearance.

'Field Commander' Screenshot 1

Just what you need in war - units with big red stripes on 'em.

Framerate issues crop up too often as well. If you're trying to convince a new audience unfamiliar with strategy games that they should take a gamble and opt for a new experience, you won't do it with action that stutters. By their very nature, strategy games call for patience and timing, so extending the waiting process with technical problems isn't something to endear it.

But wait, we're giving you the bad news first. If you haven't been put off yet, Field Commander isn't broken, it isn't a bad game and it is something that you won't find elsewhere in the PSP library.

Problems drop to the back of your mind when you've got the upper hand in combat, and surrounding enemy units to pump little rounds into their tubby frames is always a pleasure. Battles sway and flow like a giddy drinker, with a wide selection of land, sea and air units to deploy and crush the enemy.

Maps aren't massive, but they are varied enough to provide alternative tactical options such as destroying terrain to surprise enemies, concealing submarines until critical moments and making the most of long distance weapons. Cities can be conquered to provide finance, while factories are always a prime target for manufacturing new units. The way you use terrain can be much more important than the deployment of units, with mountains and bridges becoming more valuable than big guns.

'Field Commander' Screenshot 2

Deploy the exploding laptops and stand clear.

For console gamers that aren't that familiar with strategy titles, there's an impressive array of tactics to take advantage of. Destroying neutral cities to stop your enemy from exploiting them, sacrificing your kamikaze pilots by crashing planes directly into the enemy and simply learning the vision and attack capabilities of each unit is enough to make the 30 different missions worth the effort. The more you play, the more the game opens up with little variations on a theme, and although every one of the missions have essentially the same goal (kill and/or capture), there is always an alternative approach with some fun experimentation.

That's if you want to experiment. At times it's possible to crush the opposing forces with sheer weight of numbers. Each unit has a Division Power, a special attack that builds from experience in battle, and once these come into play battles are quickly over. Being able to drop paratroopers onto any free square on the map seems to be too much of an advantage when you can land on enemy HQ and capture it within a couple of rounds.

The fog of war restricts the players' vision and adds tension early on in a battle, but for single players, there's nothing exciting about watching, or rather not watching, your enemy's movements. The screen jerks as units move invisibly, and again it's something that stubs the toe of excitement. Impatient gamers won't be impressed with the pace of the game at the beginning and end of the battles, where in your mind you'll see victory, but it takes time to finish off every unit or pummel a HQ to rubble.

'Field Commander' Screenshot 3

Invisible snipers. Bet Sony wishes it had some for the next-gen battle.

Multiplayer is a strength of Field Commander, starting with a hot swap mode where two players pass the PSP to take turns, which obviously suits the genre perfectly. With realtime versus mode, Transmission Mode and local Wi-Fi two-player head-to-head matches, there's plenty to choose from. There's even an impressive Mission Creator mode, where players can host their own maps online for others to download and upload their ranking data to a leaderboard.

Although Field Commander has plenty of options, it's doubtful hardcore strategy heads will find enough to get lost in. It's a cute enough PSP strategy game, but it's not going to be long lasting for a crowd that has been spoilt with the genre. If you're not that familiar with the genre and you're looking for an alternative to all those PSP racing games, ports and ports of racing games, Field Commander is distracting enough. But with a lack of distinctive character and only functional technology, with all the good will in the world it's never going to become a favourite. And there's no good will on a battlefield. There's only winners and the dead.

6 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Matt.

About Matt Martin

Read more articles from Matt by visiting the Matt Martin archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (33) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Psi #1 5 years ago

    every time i read a review for the psp i honestly want it to be good so i have an excuse to buy one!

  • HarryPalmer #2 5 years ago

    Read reviews of wipeout, loco roco, GTA, tekken, ridge racer, Exit, syphon filter then buy one (if you havnt got a ds or a ps2).

  • DUFFMAN5 #3 5 years ago

    Syphon Filter is brilliant, (as good if not better than 1 and 2)once you get used to the controls. I do think we are starting to get a few good games for the psp. GTA VC will be worth getting.

  • Psi #4 5 years ago

    yeah harry :( got 2 ds's and a ps2, xmas is coming soon anyway moneys gonna be tight so maybe one less must have device aint a bad thing.

  • Dizzy #5 5 years ago

    >Given that this is a practical carbon copy of Advance Wars

    Better put on your flame-resitant suit NOW!

  • MadMirko #6 5 years ago

    TK421, you should read the review:

    Advance Wars series - presentation, style, replayability, charm and deep strategic choices make it a beautiful thing

    and

    Field Commander, a decent stab at turn-based strategy in the palm of your hand. The basics are there, and it works, but it struggles to distinguish itself and is hampered by an identity crisis, annoying technical issues and a general lack of tension.

    This (the bold stuff) is nothing like Advance Wars.

    A shame, I was looking forward to Field Commander. Hopefully it finds its way into the bargain bin soon.

  • Ceatlan #7 5 years ago

    TK421,

    I have both this for the PSP and all the advance wars games for GBA and DS. This game is definitely 'trying' to be an advanced wars clone for the PSP, but it does fall short it lots of little ways. Which as the review indicates, never make it a bad game, just not a stellar one like advance wars. I suspect that they may improve it in subsequent versions, but for the time being this is a not bad, but basically flawed attempt at replicating advance wars on the PSP.

    Ceatlan
    Edited by 2 at 12/10/06 @ 09:25

  • Eldritch #8 5 years ago

    Rather late review, innit?

    Anyway, 6/10 doesn't open my wallet. I'd rather spend some more time on LOTR Tactics, which is as mediocre, but happens to sit on my shelf already. I'll get Field Commander, when its's down to €20.

  • OldB0y #9 5 years ago

    Field Commander actually has 2 modes of on-line play, realtime versus mode, and Transmission Mode - a kind of play by e-mail mode. Both are good. IMHO this game rates at least an 8 - I couldn't put it down until I'd completed the story mode.

    Krudster: mp error fixed, apologies.
    Edited by 1 at 12/10/06 @ 11:19

  • Eldritch #10 5 years ago

    TK421:

    More like a copy of Battle Isle and Incubation, to be sure.

  • repairmanjack #11 5 years ago

    Well, review was a long time coming, and the score has a sense of inevitability about it. This is currently £20 new at Game. Might not be a stellar first-attempt, but this is exactly the kind of game developers should be encouraged to bring out on the PSP. It doesn't do third-person shooters well at all (despite the remarkable plaudits for Syphon Filter, it's still a bit of a swine to control when the action heats up or you have to protect a typically retarded AI character).

    And, of course, the game is playable online. Is the reviewer a casualty of ADHD?

  • MadMirko #12 5 years ago

    Incubation

    Oh how I wish they made a sequel to that gem. But seeing the current trends it would either be a RTS or a FPS with downloadable costumes for your soldiers.

  • Eldritch #13 5 years ago

    As for Incubation, well, I do know the original devs quite well (former colleagues, actually), and, as far as I know, it won't happen. Ubisoft is literally sitting on the franchise and doesn't do anything with it. The same goes for Battle Isle. Kind of sad, really. *sigh*

  • Arwin #14 5 years ago

    I find it amazing that a review can miss one of the strongest elements of this game, which is the really extensive online mode. I mean, seriously, what's up with that?

    From gamespot, which as a much more balanced review:

    [link url=http://www.gamespot.com/psp/strategy/ fieldcommander/review.html?sid=6151942
    ]http://ww w.gamespot.com/psp/strategy/fie...[/link]

    Once you're done with the campaign and playing quick battles, you can take the fight to other players with Field Commander's vast array of multiplayer modes. Outside of hot swap and ad hoc head-to-head, online play is included, which lets you take on other commanders via Sony's online network. This might be one mode where the relative small size of Field Commander's maps might be a blessing, as the online matches are kept from extending to unmanageable lengths of time. If the prospect of spending up to an hour or more playing a match sounds daunting, the developers have thoughtfully included a "transmission" mode in the game, which is equivalent to the play-by-e-mail option of many PC turn-based strategy games. Each player takes a turn, and then submits the data to the server. The other player can log in and get that information at any time, either a minute later, hours later, or up to a day later. This makes for a more convenient way to play, as the other person doesn't have to be there, but matches can conceivably take hours, days, or longer, depending on how often each person logs in to take a turn. All these modes work pretty well, and an online ranking system is also available so you can see how you measure up against other field commanders. Perhaps the most exciting aspect of the online system is map-sharing, which lets you upload any missions you create with the game's mission editor online for other people to try.

    Given everything Field Commander has to offer--a solid gameplay design, a good-sized campaign with an attractive presentation, and a multitude of options for multiplayer action and added content--the game is easy to recommend to any PSP owner looking for some turn-based strategy. Field Commander does bear a number of similarities to the Advance Wars games on Nintendo handhelds, but has enough going for it that it stands just fine on its own. The robust online component in particular gives Field Commander an edge over just about every other currently available handheld strategy game.

  • mingster #15 5 years ago

    If you need a good Strategy RPG (SRPG) to keep you going till Disgaea appears on the PSP i highly recommend Spectral Souls.

  • MadMirko #16 5 years ago

    Thanks Eldritch for ruining my day. :(

    For the record, I would take an Incubation sequel without the Incubation setting if Ubi refuses to ransom it. The style of play and the excellent level design would work just as well in another apocalyptic we-are-all-gonna-die-down-here backdrop.

    If you happen to meet the original devs, and they still care, tell them their game (and its expansion) was ace.

  • mingster #17 5 years ago

    Krudster: MP error fixed

    Multiplayer wise this should bump the score up ton a 7 at least IMHO

    and considering how late this review is i find this a serious faux pas please ammend
    Edited by 1 at 12/10/06 @ 11:18

  • gth #18 5 years ago

    I really liked Field Commander. Sure, it lacked strategical depth and was too easy and therefore its finished too early. But nevertheless, it had that "must finish that mission" feeling. Was worth the money.

  • Eldritch #19 5 years ago

    @Mirko

    Oh, I'll meet some of them next month, so I'll let them know. (C:

    Actually, I keep telling them all the time, how much I love that game.

    In the meantime, try this:

    [link url=http://scayra.free.fr/
    ]http://scayra.free.fr/
    [/link]

    Among other things you'll find a 3dfx hardware emulator! Enjoy!

  • MadMirko #20 5 years ago

    Eldritch, I forgive you ;-)

    Someone will have to leave work early today...

  • Eldritch #21 5 years ago

    Glad to be of service! (C:

  • belziah #22 5 years ago

    First of all, the games been out for nearly three months, what the hell took you so long?

    Krudster: multiplayer portion edited, thanks for feedback, apologies for the error.
    Edited by 1 at 12/10/06 @ 11:17

  • Psi #23 5 years ago

    @ dabo where in my post did I say the games were crap? Batbat said more crap games, not myself.

  • samk #24 5 years ago

    Being a fan of the Advance Wars series I bought this on the day of release. Maybe I've been spoiled by the AW series, but FC proved to be a major disappointment sadly.

    - The entire single player campaign is a cakewalk. I kept playing on in the hope that it was just easing new players into the mechanics, but alas no, every mission was easily completed first time. As mentioned in the review there's a lack of tension, which is because you're never on the backfoot having to work some magic to get yourself out of tricky situations. You're always on the offensive; having at least as many units as the AI, which is keen to move its tanks into the range of your artillery for no apparent reason.

    - The "skirmish" one-off battles with the AI are not graded, and again, they're much too easy. In fact, nothing is saved at all regarding your progress in skirmish battles. Compare that to Advance Wars in which every map in every game mode saves your top five scores, which promotes massive replayability.

    - You can tell some Sony executives sat down and thought "right, we're going to blatantly copy Advance Wars, so what can we do for some oneupmanship? I know, let's make the battlefield 3D. Genius." The transition to 3D is completely pointless; it has no gameplay benefits at all and just results in units that look a big jumbly mess of pixels, buildings that look horrendously low-poly, fewer tiles visible than Advance Wars despite the PSP's lovely widescreen, and zoomed-in unit vs unit battles that look downright appalling.

    - In one mission the AI has an invisible tank which is indestructable and kills any of your units within a range of several tiles with one hit! This should give an indication of how poor the design is of anything in the game which wasn't directly robbed from AW.

    - In AW, if a LAND-based vehicle runs out of fuel it just sits there and you can't move it unless it gets refuelled with an APC. But in FC, they simply explode. Talk about a STUPID change in mechanic. It just makes players have to go around every unit and check its fuel every single turn.

    - As mentioned in the review there are frequent delays, which is due to loading stuff on-the-fly from the UMD. I mean honestly, if it wasn't for the battlefield being in 3D they could have fitted everything in memory in the first place.

    FC's only saving grace is its multiplayer. If you're looking for predominantly a single player experience, then AW is absoutely the way to go if you have both a PSP and DS.

  • tiddles #25 5 years ago

    A solid game which is in many ways feels fresher than the increasingly arcane Advance Wars series (although it does copy the basic format shamelessly)... pity the graphics aren't better, however - it's hard to feel that 2D isn't preferable to 3D when the frame-rate is poor, and the lack of effective LOD means that models become a mush of pixels at any substantial distance (ie. the main tactical view)...

  • Grump #26 5 years ago

    I preferred this to the latest AW.

  • yegon #27 5 years ago

    >>this is a not bad, but basically flawed attempt at replicating advance wars on the PSP.
    -----


    Agreed. If you're a fan of the genre, I wholeheartedly recommend it, just don't expect anything amazing.

    A side note, it's FAAAAR better played off the stick at 333. I played the first third or so from the UMD, which I own, then got so frustrated with the loading and pauses I got hold of the hooky version.

  • Triggerhappytel #28 5 years ago

    What I want to know is; why the fuck don't Sony publish SOE games in Europe?! I mean seriously, the only one I can think of is Everquest Online Adventures which went down like a brick in water.

    There's countless SOE games which are published by Activision and UbiSoft, and not their parent company. Where is the fucking sense in that?!

  • Evidence #29 5 years ago

    I've just got a PSP and looking for some good games to get for it.
    So far Daxter and GTA LCS seem like money well spent.

    I'm a big fan of AW on GBA and DS, so may give this a go.

  • Hughes. #30 5 years ago

    This seemed a fair and balanced review, up until I got to this...

    "If you're not that familiar with the genre and you're looking for an alternative to all those PSP racing games, ports and ports of racing games"

    At which point I just know I can expect a thread filled with the usual PSP hating cunty club saying "PSP HAS NO GAMES!"

    Hey presto.

    Thanks a fucking bunch.

  • Lex_Luthor #31 5 years ago

    The apes need their feedin' Hughes.

  • Hughes. #32 5 years ago

    I suppose so. I thought the infantile format bashing stuff had died down on these threads lately, I guess the way it inflates the post count must be good business, if the reviewers are going to indulge in it too.

  • SeesThroughAll #33 5 years ago

    Agreed. Fact of the matter is, the PSP has had a far stronger second half of the year, and still has loads to come before Xmas, but you'd never know it reading these comments threads.

    Good point. I also read the EG review, and it does a fine job of, once again, punishing a game for being released on the PSP.

    But fortunately, most people who own a PSP, know why they bought it, and what it can do, are playing it, rather then listening to that crowd.

    Me? Enjoying this game, and looking forward for the likes of MKU and MegaDrive Collection this Xmas.
    Edited by 1 at 15/10/06 @ 20:11