Goodness knows what Raven have spent the past three years doing, but surely this utterly
banal shooter isn't it. What, it is? Cripes. Actually, Wolfie deserves a bit better than that disdainful brush-off. Only a little bit though. Let's rewind a little. As Id's immortal-hero-with sexuallysuggestive- initials BJ Blazkowicz, you're once again roped into an alternative WWII where the blasted Bosche have uncovered a window into a supernatural realm known as the Veil.
Before you get to wade through that particular sea of mediocrity though, you'll meet a bunch of heroic German Resistance types with comedy accents 'Allo 'Allo's Herr Flick himself would be proud of, before being introduced to the blasty mechanics via a train yard shootout that later takes a mightily cool turn for the bizarre.
Up to that point, we'd actually pondered aloud whether this was going to confound all expectations and turn out to be rather... swish. Trouble is, by blowing its supernatural load so early, BJ's hurried and clichéd inauguration into the mysteries of the Veil forty-five minutes or so later fails to resonate in the way that it perhaps should, instead dissolving painfully into 'this power lets you see an enemy's weak spot' or 'this power lets you slow time so you can dodge a sub-Indiana Jones trap'.
Even the filter effect whenever you enter the netherworld is a letdown, the sub-Bioshock spooky baddies and cheesily obvious gameplay facets even more so. And it only gets worse from there. VEILED THREAT As a WWII shooter to trump the likes of Medal of Honor, Wolfenstein ironically shows promise. The authentic olde weapons all feel weighty, environments go to hell in pleasingly destructive fashion and dying Nazis sport a range of hideous fatalities (catch a Jerry in the neck or face with a swathe of bullets and you might even catch yourself grimacing in sympathy).
We also like the swapping out of explosive barrels with gooey ones that play havoc with gravity in a localised area when detonated, but it's a rare thumbs-up in a sea of middle fingers. Ultimately, Wolfenstein brings very few genuinely novel ideas to the FPS table, unforgivable given both the lengthy development time and the legacy of the IP. It's not terrible by any stretch but it is utterly forgettable and, even though its belated release comes at a time when most shooters have packed their bags and headed for the safety of 2010, simply doesn't pack near enough pizzazz to stand out from the throng. Fans of BJs everywhere wail as one as another once-proud franchise bites the dust.
Rob Taylor
// Overview
Verdict
"Average" 1) An intermediate level or degree.
2) Wolfenstein. Damn shame.
Uppers
Brilliantly weighty weapons Bloodily terrific death throes.
I never liked the original or the sequel so didn't have a lot of interest in this. Looks like that was justified. I had a feeling this wasn't going to be very good.
That as it may be, I look forward to getting my hands on this title and putting it through its paces on my own. I've read other reviews expressing similar responses, however it seems that there are some Wolfenstein fans whom are quite happy with how it turned out. Perhaps I too shall be one of those.
I think this is another case of critics missing the point.
Wolfenstein is not a revoluntionary shooter. It was never going to be, really; whilst Return to Castle Wolfenstein was a solid shooter, it was never anything groundbreaking. This new title isn't either, but it offers a really solid slice of shooty action with some really great visuals at times and some novel ideas. But whilst the story is banal, the supernatural aspects underwhelming and the innovation lacking, Wolfenstein has one major ace up its sleeve... its bloody good fun.
wtf 5/10 thats bullsh!t the single player is f**king wicked if u play this game just play it without thinking cod or kz2 or other fps this game is just a fun shooter its 7/10 easy i give it 8/10 just because its so fun to shoot nazis all day long it never gets old if u only play online dont buy it but if ur down with single player then give it a go
WTF????? sorry CVG but you just lost all credibility. "feels like a old game" ok now thats officially the most pathetic thing i have ever heard congratz. obviously yous have never heard of wolfenstein, ITS A CLASSIC GAME, ITS THE DADDY OF FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS, ITS THE GRANDFATHER TO THE GREAT DOOM! OF CORSE ITS GOING TO FEEL OLD IT HAS ALLOT OF HISTORY BEHIND IT. god how can some one be so dumb? guys dont believe this BS review. its a bloody great game, some of the areas are allot of fun to explore, the missions are constantly mixed up and changed. your constantly fighting new enemies saying s**t how am i going to beat this bitch. the weapons are really cool, the flamethrower actually burns the enemies and they look like there burned ive never seen a game have that effect, all games normally just have the guy laying there like nothing hapend. the hit detection in the game is very good, shoot someone in the leg and they drop to the ground, very few games do that. there are a few bugs in the game, which can get annoying. the graphics are a massive letdown. its not as good as return to castle wolfenstein or wolfenstein 3D. BUT there classics this games NOT! a bad game and deserves NO LESS! than a 7 if your harsh and nit picky. me id give it a 7.8 god and i thought games radar were full of s**t, they gave it a 8. congratz CVG youve raised the bar another lvl LMAO
That review is way too harsh. I picked this up yesterday (release day) and It's a great game, nothing special but nothing bad either. No game is perfect I think CVG needs to remember this the next time they review something.
WTF????? sorry CVG but you just lost all credibility. "feels like a old game" ok now thats officially the most pathetic thing i have ever heard congratz. obviously yous have never heard of wolfenstein, ITS A CLASSIC GAME, ITS THE DADDY OF FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS, ITS THE GRANDFATHER TO THE GREAT DOOM! OF CORSE ITS GOING TO FEEL OLD IT HAS ALLOT OF HISTORY BEHIND IT. god how can some one be so dumb? guys dont believe this BS review. its a bloody great game, some of the areas are allot of fun to explore, the missions are constantly mixed up and changed. your constantly fighting new enemies saying s**t how am i going to beat this bitch. the weapons are really cool, the flamethrower actually burns the enemies and they look like there burned ive never seen a game have that effect, all games normally just have the guy laying there like nothing hapend. the hit detection in the game is very good, shoot someone in the leg and they drop to the ground, very few games do that. there are a few bugs in the game, which can get annoying. the graphics are a massive letdown. its not as good as return to castle wolfenstein or wolfenstein 3D. BUT there classics this games NOT! a bad game and deserves NO LESS! than a 7 if your harsh and nit picky. me id give it a 7.8 god and i thought games radar were full of s**t, they gave it a 8. congratz CVG youve raised the bar another lvl LMAO
I get the sentiment, but this ISN'T a CVG review. X360 World are responsible for this, CVG merely printed it here (as part of their sister magazine deals).
That review is way too harsh. I picked this up yesterday (release day) and It's a great game, nothing special but nothing bad either. No game is perfect I think CVG needs to remember this the next time they review something.
Its not cvgs review its ripped from a mag and i think its pretty spot the multiplayer is terrible set up by a bunch of pen pushing monkeys and the main game is rubbish. i'm glad i rented it first would have been peeved to have wasted money on it
Harsh review I must say, whoever wrote it. I would give it around 7/10 myself. Sure there's nothing new about it, but then again what is these days. You can only polish something til it shines, and from what I've played of it so far it has managed that IMO.
WTF????? sorry CVG but you just lost all credibility. "feels like a old game" ok now thats officially the most pathetic thing i have ever heard congratz. obviously yous have never heard of wolfenstein, ITS A CLASSIC GAME, ITS THE DADDY OF FIRST PERSON SHOOTERS, ITS THE GRANDFATHER TO THE GREAT DOOM! OF CORSE ITS GOING TO FEEL OLD IT HAS ALLOT OF HISTORY BEHIND IT. god how can some one be so dumb? guys dont believe this BS review. its a bloody great game, some of the areas are allot of fun to explore, the missions are constantly mixed up and changed. your constantly fighting new enemies saying s**t how am i going to beat this bitch. the weapons are really cool, the flamethrower actually burns the enemies and they look like there burned ive never seen a game have that effect, all games normally just have the guy laying there like nothing hapend. the hit detection in the game is very good, shoot someone in the leg and they drop to the ground, very few games do that. there are a few bugs in the game, which can get annoying. the graphics are a massive letdown. its not as good as return to castle wolfenstein or wolfenstein 3D. BUT there classics this games NOT! a bad game and deserves NO LESS! than a 7 if your harsh and nit picky. me id give it a 7.8 god and i thought games radar were full of s**t, they gave it a 8. congratz CVG youve raised the bar another lvl LMAO
It feels like an old game because it does nothing new, it feels old which makes gameplay less exciting.
It doesn't matter what this game is called or it's history. If a game was called Shat-Man-Doo but was a 90% title I would buy it.
I like it how you said that "some" of the areas are a lot of fun to explore.
When you burn an enemy in Bioshock with Napalm from the Chemical Thrower the enemies burn and stay burned when dead.
If you shoot somebody in the leg in CoD 4 they fall down. Nothing new here. Moving on.
Like you said, there are bugs in the game. The graphics are s**t and it's not as good as the previous Wolfenstein titles.
So, in conclusion, this game does nothing new, is not up to current standards design wise, or graphicaly and the gameplay feels old.
Er, so why exactly should this game be labed as "Good" and get a 7 or 8? The answer is: it shouldn't.
Don't listen to this total bulls**t review. Probably reviewed by a guy who thinks Viva Pinata is too taxing!
If you're a fan of the Wolfie games then this is exactly what you want, fantastic pacing, great explosive set pieces and above all great fun, a definite 8.5 - 9 score!!
This is another lazy shooty game, and you expect good scores. I think reviews in general are way, way too generous these days.
To think how many shooty games have been released in the last 3 years with good scores.
5/10 ahould be average. 7/10 very good. 9/10 best in genre etc.
The reason why people are "moaning" as you purport is perhaps because they have played the game and disagree strongly with the reviewers comments, and as this is a forum, that is exactly what people are entitled to do whether they agree or disagree.
And you as someone who moans about having a complete indifference to console FPS', why the hell do you feel the need to criticise gamers who are genuinely interested in this game.
This is another lazy shooty game, and you expect good scores. I think reviews in general are way, way too generous these days.
To think how many shooty games have been released in the last 3 years with good scores.
5/10 ahould be average. 7/10 very good. 9/10 best in genre etc.
The reason why people are "moaning" as you purport is perhaps because they have played the game and disagree strongly with the reviewers comments, and as this is a forum, that is exactly what people are entitled to do whether they agree or disagree.
And you as someone who moans about having a complete indifference to console FPS', why the hell do you feel the need to criticise gamers who are genuinely interested in this game.
Not bad for anyone young enough not to play RTCW. However this warrants a rent before a purchase IMO. It's in the same crowd as haze, turok and maybe prey. It's ok... like an average shag - and forgetful afterwards!
It's almost as if a review is just one person's opinion and not the "correct" judgement across the entire face of mankind!
Let the Metacritic score lead the way. If all of the reviewers reckon it's dull and doesn't do anything new (please name something it does well and I'll think about it) then they must have a point.
I've wasted money on games before and tried to defend them when the reviews said they were crap, thinking that I saw something they didn't. But that's just Buyer's Pride messing with it. You don't want to have wasted your money on a turd.
It's almost as if a review is just one person's opinion and not the "correct" judgement across the entire face of mankind!
Let the Metacritic score lead the way. If all of the reviewers reckon it's dull and doesn't do anything new (please name something it does well and I'll think about it) then they must have a point.
I've wasted money on games before and tried to defend them when the reviews said they were crap, thinking that I saw something they didn't. But that's just Buyer's Pride messing with it. You don't want to have wasted your money on a turd.
Metacritics scores and opinions seem to be up and down like a friggin' yo-yo, just like they are here. But everyone seems to have an opinion to which they are entitled to of course.
There is some wisdom to what you mentioned about defending games you've wasted money on, I've done it, but not in this case....I think. I've already completed it and got my moneys worth out of it so I don't feel bad. (I hate that feeling of wasting money on a turkey) It's not a keeper though so time will tell if I feel like going through it again or just trade it in for something better. (perhaps for Fallout 3 expansion pack 2 on Friday)
Last time I did it was probably the last Dawn of War expansion pack. I faithfully bought it and tried to talk myself into liking it, but it didn't work. It was seriously lacking.
Before that, Top Gear Rally on N64. Loved the series on the SNES, but that incarnation was dull beyond belief. Controls were crap, feeling of speed was non-existent, tracks were bland. I argued that people just weren't getting it, but in the end I gave in and agreed that it was pants.
Before that, Magic Sword on the SNES. Easiest game ever, complete waste of time and effort. I played it, trying desperately to not hate it and focus on the not-totally-sh!t parts. But it didn't work. At least I only paid trade-in price for it.
Im sorry CVG this review is absolute rubbish whoever wrote this i hope got sacked on monday morning, i understand this has been copied and pasted from one of your sister magazines but you owe to yourselves to re-review this game and hopefully come up with something better than 5.7 OMG. The single player is a great game, graphics are great(on par with bioshock) the guns are awesome and feel great to fire, the veil powers are new and remind me in away of Prey(when you went into the spirit world) the script was nether ment to be serious and reminds me of something out of Indiana Jones, and feels just like some of the old medal of honour games and also contols are great too. So where the Hell did 5.7 come from? Yes the multiplayer is not as good as everyone hoped for, graphics are not great where you 1st look at them and yes there is framerate issues in multiplayer(most peolple think it is lag from the server but it is actually framerate, more noticably when in side buildings) Yes they removed the Lieutenant class and made the soldier class over powered and yes the Veil strike is crap that replaced the Air strike, and yes they have taken out team elimination mode which is really annoying(hope they patch that and enable us to turn respawns off in team deathmatch) But... Stopwatch mode is still as awesome as ever and it is multiplayer at its finest(when you have two teams who know how to play wolfenstein that is) I really hope someone from CVG office takes another look at this review and re-evaluates it and does this game some justice. This game is alot of fun people dont listen to this review its B******s.
Honestly reading the comments here, I see nothing but the "if you're a fan, you'll like this" phrase.
If that's the case, and it's a mediocre game as the overall consensus appears to be, then only fans will play it, only some will like it.
As such all this game has done is successfully reduce the fanbase of a decent ip. After a 3 year development cycle, (which is the average to make a AAA title), the developers should really be dissapointed with themselves.
Oh and by the way could all the rabid fanboys please calm down. This review is just one persons opinion afterall. There's no need to foam at the mouth and demand for the reviewer to be sacked, or for the review to be rewritten.
Personally I trust low review scores more so than high ones (Spore anyone?). Atleast you can be sure that the review hasn't been bought.
This review touches on a lot of salient points in retrospect, now that I've played through the game. I would probably rate it at 6.0, if we go by the usual rating system where it seems 7.0 is an average score as opposed to 5.0, which should technically be the average on a 10.0 scale.
A shame. "RTCW" back in 2001 was fantastic, yet this successor - 8 years down the line - brings little to the table. That one of the boss battles has to be repeated three times screams late 1980's to early 1990's and simply isn't good enough in this day and age from companies with the capabilities that they have. Short of a complete overhaul, I think it may be time to put the "Wolfenstein"-franchise out to pasture and retire with its dignity more or less intact.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Brilliantly weighty weapons
