Battle: Los Angeles

 PC
Metascore
38

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 9 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 9
  2. Mixed: 2 out of 9
  3. Negative: 7 out of 9
  1. Cheat Code Central
    Mar 30, 2011
    60
    The game is thirty minutes long and costs ten dollars. That's thirty three cents a minute to play this game. You'll get better value out of a psychic hotline.
  2. IGN
    Mar 15, 2011
    55
    The game lacks variety, but it also doesn't outstay its welcome. If you want some laughs and don't mind that the shooting experience is average at best, playing through this alien invasion is probably more entertaining than the movie and you'll get some Achievements/Trophies out of it.
  3. Meristation
    Mar 18, 2011
    45
    Being a cheap downloadable game is not an excuse for this. Extremely short campaign, really low production values and lack of alternative modes or multiplayer make this an extremely poor deal. There are cheaper games that offer so much more than this.
  5. XGN
    Jun 18, 2011
    40
    Although the looks of Battle: Los Angeles are acceptable, the length of the game is not. The price doesn't justify the quality of the game and you'll find yourself longing for a good game even before you reach the end of this incredibly mediocre game, that doesn't even last two hours.
  6. PC Gamer
    Jun 18, 2011
    30
    Good grief--I could buy Half-Life 2 with that $10. [Aug 2011, p.76]
    All this publication's reviews
  7. PC Games (Russia)
    Apr 8, 2011
    30
    A pointless waste of money. [May 2011, p.109]
    All this publication's reviews
  8. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    May 22, 2011
    20
    Battle: Los Angeles looks, plays and entertains as some Uwe Boll of game word took it and created it with the support of an enthusiastic circle of amateur programmers. [Issue#203]
    All this publication's reviews
  9. Gamekult
    Mar 17, 2011
    20
    Quotation forthcoming.
  10. Absolute Games
    Mar 29, 2011
    10
    1.5 Gbytes of data. 10 US dollars. 45 minutes of gameplay. Ladies and gentlemen, we have a new winner for the title of the shortest commercially available first-person shooter. You've seen the bad movie – now play a crappy game.

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
3.2

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 45 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 45
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 45
  3. Negative: 34 out of 45
  1. Sinster
    Mar 18, 2011
    4
    Ok to kill time.. what you expect for the price. The graphics are okay the game is linear the dialogue is joke. The cut scenes are stills.Ok to kill time.. what you expect for the price. The graphics are okay the game is linear the dialogue is joke. The cut scenes are stills. I wasn't expecting much but I don't think I wasted the money.… Full Review »
  2. not_batman27
    Oct 8, 2012
    1
    good thing i bought this on a sale for 2.50$ from steam.only reason i even gave it a score of 1, is because of the great graphics. the game isgood thing i bought this on a sale for 2.50$ from steam.only reason i even gave it a score of 1, is because of the great graphics. the game is short as hell! less than an hour, theres like only 3 weapons! the gameplay sucks, i am not sure if there even was a story, this seems to me more like a joke rather than a game. i have no idea who made it and i rather not know, all i want to say is that this game sucks soooo much!!!! worst 2.50$ spent ever!… Full Review »
  3. BlackOmega
    May 11, 2011
    0
    Wow, what a waste of money this game was. It last all of about an hour if you explore everything. I couldn't believe that it cost $10. I feelWow, what a waste of money this game was. It last all of about an hour if you explore everything. I couldn't believe that it cost $10. I feel swindled.
    As for the game, it's ok I suppose. I would've expected the cut-scenes to at least be animated. They're just cell-shaded cartoons. Don't buy this game and waste your money.    … Full Review »
See all user reviews »