An innovative game that is not for everyone
As someone who is used to playing FPS games commando style, taking on hordes of zombies / nazis / aliens and whatnot with a crowbar and a revolver alone, playing a game like Brothers in Arms was quite the unmerciful change of pace and playing style.
The game was made in 2005 and I have played it for the first time now in 2011. The graphics are decent and as good as you might expect from a title that is a couple of years old, but they are still good enough to immerse you in the frenzy of a World War shooter and the sound design, voice acting and level design is as good as it could be this day. <br />
Arguably the most crucial design element of Brothers in Arms is the squad based combat. Instead of taking on the Germans single-handedly, you are in charge of a changing team of GI and tanks. You can order them to move, follow you and lay the smack down on the enemies so you or one of your teams can flank them and send them to Alabama. This makes for some interesting tactical decisions and also changes the way you think about FPS games. For example, if you kill some of your men or even all of them, the level does not end but if you get killed, you have to reload from your last checkpoint. So, unlike the hero in the COD or BF series, you send the poor souls to do the dirty work while you supervise and scout out the surroundings. The levels do feel a bit like a puzzle sometimes as most areas have only one best way of going about attacking and killing your enemies, which might make the game more tactical but also makes it feel a bit unrealistic and forcefully linear (all the covers are exactly where they need to be etc.). <br />
The game tries to narrate the story in a way that loads all the horror of the war onto your shoulders as you sit hunched over your keyboard / gamepad. Your mates are dying, your memories of terror are as lively and bloody as ever and all for what ? FOR WHAT ? . . . . well, you get the picture<br />
I thought the game was clever and its approach quite revolutionary but too me, it was a bit to hard especially with the controls being so fiddly as well. A game so unforgiving yet so insisting on the player being painstakingly accurate in his decision is a tough combination and it took the air out of my fun balloon after I played this game about 15 hours or so. Dying repeatedly not because I failed to rise up to the challenges but I could not figure out how the game wants me to play it is a design flaw in my opinion. <br />
Still, for all of those who are looking for a slower and more tactical (or maybe more challenging) FPS shooter than Call of Duty or its relatives, this might be your go-to game. <br />
To me, it's just a notch too hard. Too much simulator and not enough arcade.<br />
