Day of Defeat: Source

 PC
User Score
9.0

Universal acclaim- based on 1930 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,699 out of 1930
  2. Mixed: 113 out of 1930
  3. Negative: 118 out of 1930
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. sinadoom
    Nov 30, 2011
    6
    The gameplay isn't for everyone, but once you get into it the actual game can be quite rewarding. It feels like TF2 + CSS + WW2 setting = DoD Source. There's classes and it requires team work but unlike TF2 there is skill in aiming and shooting and there's lots of recoil. The gameplay can be addicting, but it's nothing special, though. Personally I prefer this to CSS. The movement andThe gameplay isn't for everyone, but once you get into it the actual game can be quite rewarding. It feels like TF2 + CSS + WW2 setting = DoD Source. There's classes and it requires team work but unlike TF2 there is skill in aiming and shooting and there's lots of recoil. The gameplay can be addicting, but it's nothing special, though. Personally I prefer this to CSS. The movement and controls feel more smooth, and the recoil is massively exaggerated for better balancing. Each gun feels VERY different so picking the right class at the right time can make the difference between victory and loss. The problem this game suffers from is the lack of decent servers. I mostly played custom "orange" maps for more gun on gun action because the standard maps do suck (apart from dod_avalanche and dod_colmar). It manages to feel realistic but still keep gameplay simple and arcade in a way.… Expand
  2. MorganH.
    Aug 9, 2007
    6
    While I more or less love all WWII/WWI games, I found it hard to enjoy DODs. The game seems to have been beautifully engineered, but my first dislike is the lack of weapons/ lack of research, and the gun physics. Some games seem to have the notion that when you fire a gun the kick forces it up, this is true, but DOD goes way overboard with kick. Another factor with this is that even if While I more or less love all WWII/WWI games, I found it hard to enjoy DODs. The game seems to have been beautifully engineered, but my first dislike is the lack of weapons/ lack of research, and the gun physics. Some games seem to have the notion that when you fire a gun the kick forces it up, this is true, but DOD goes way overboard with kick. Another factor with this is that even if kick raises your gun, the weight brings it back down to more or less the same position. Well there is my little rant today… Expand
  3. AverageJoe
    Nov 9, 2008
    5
    Well I loved the original, more that any other game I played. While this version looks better, I`m afraid it doesn`t do it for me. It`s all run and gun, no strategy like the original. Plays more like unreal tornament than a WW II game in my opinion.
  4. Overby
    Aug 1, 2008
    6
    I gave dod 10 in rating bot only 6 to dods why..? because of the weapons, i would like if u made it more lige the old where there are many more weapons to chose between.
  5. BobbyT.
    Jan 23, 2007
    7
    Not as good as the original, but still very fun. Needs more maps, and less "spectators".
  6. SamuelK.
    Mar 30, 2006
    6
    I think the source engine make the maps more beautiful. It Negative: Few Maps available...but there will be more... The new remaked map dod_kalt has many bugs. Also the game itselfs still has bugs.
  7. JohnD.
    May 10, 2006
    6
    Valve screwed the pooch on this one. Gamespeed was pushed to a frenetic pace, compared to the original, which is a plus if you're more into deathmatches than tactics. The graphics and physics, however, are well concieved and executed! The free mod was superior in all regards, but I still enjoy this newer version enough to give it a "thumbs up".
  8. M.Chatmann
    Jul 9, 2006
    7
    Good maps. Good fun. But to slow to load i most cases!
  9. RazwanM.
    May 2, 2008
    7
    Starting to loose its appeal as there should be more updates to bring it back to life.
  10. CC
    Aug 6, 2008
    7
    Love the Source phyics and the fast-paced gameplay. But I need iron sights for all weapons as well as other gametypes (eg TDM, DM, CTF).
  11. AnonymousMC
    Apr 1, 2009
    7
    I really enjoyed the original, but this game feels like it falls short. Yes, it looks better and has a physics engine, but there is actually less variety in classes (wow, atleast keep it the same) and the whole game feels kind of bloated and jumpy. Movement is unrealistic and the ironsights feature on the rifles is just not what DOD was about. If you want ironsights, play COD (which II really enjoyed the original, but this game feels like it falls short. Yes, it looks better and has a physics engine, but there is actually less variety in classes (wow, atleast keep it the same) and the whole game feels kind of bloated and jumpy. Movement is unrealistic and the ironsights feature on the rifles is just not what DOD was about. If you want ironsights, play COD (which I also do).… Expand
  12. BrianJ.
    Oct 30, 2005
    6
    Like some of the reviewers, I enjoyed the gameplay of the old DoD much more. Mostly, I feel that the new one plays very fast and feels less real than the original despite more realistic graphics. If gameplay could be a bit more realistically paced and the levels a little less claustrophobic, I'd be completely on board and giving this new DoD a 10.
  13. JethroW.
    Feb 15, 2006
    7
    This is a decent refresh of the original. The lowered weapon accuracy is somewhat artificial. At times I felt like I was playing as Gomer Pyle, as you could burst-fire half a clip from a Thompson at an enemy and only hit him once. The graphics and audio are excellent. One's enjoyment of the game depends almost entirely on the quality of the players on the server. If you are teamed This is a decent refresh of the original. The lowered weapon accuracy is somewhat artificial. At times I felt like I was playing as Gomer Pyle, as you could burst-fire half a clip from a Thompson at an enemy and only hit him once. The graphics and audio are excellent. One's enjoyment of the game depends almost entirely on the quality of the players on the server. If you are teamed with players who know how to play, the game is sublime and thrilling. If you are teamed with a group of inexperienced or not terribly sharp players, then it can be a long, frustrating slog. An added annoyance is the fact that nearly every server has a pack of sounds or maps that must be downloaded before you can play on them.… Expand
  14. GrubbelB.
    May 25, 2006
    7
    nice optic....but there are only some maps...no fun games...not much weapons....only one play mode...CS:S is much better.
  15. AlexB.
    May 6, 2006
    7
    a bit tedious, sometimes spend more time running to the action than in the action. Doesnt encourage me to play it much.
  16. SpectreL.
    Jul 11, 2006
    5
    I don't see any advantages of the source game engine, because all in game simply rush with too big speed. The graphycs in game on an average level. It's looks like a generic arcade, I can't play this after CS:S. CS:S - really good production.
  17. David
    Jul 14, 2006
    6
    The graphics were good few maps but still good but only features USA and Germany when where the Russians,British,Japanise and Italians. Its anoying that they didn't inclued anyone else.
  18. JamesLunz
    Jul 31, 2006
    7
    I would say its a 7.5 but they dont have it. this game is very intense and i like the blood :) the reasion i gave it a 7(or 7.5) is because WHERE ARE THE IRON SIGHTS!!! I WANA AIM DONT MY SIGHT ON THE THOMPSON AND BAR!!! this gfame would be perfect if u could do that
  19. SvenS.
    Aug 23, 2006
    5
    DoD:S is a very interesting game but it's not really good. The normal day of defeat is very good but day of defeat not.
  20. mrgamer
    Dec 25, 2007
    7
    Okay, here it is. Day of Defeat: Source is an okay game, but has a few flaws, namely damage, recoil, number of maps(not really a flaw, but it would be nice to see more maps), and so on. But, at the same time, it does what it is supposed to, which is being a semiaccurate WW2 game, and it does that pretty well. And for ten dollars off of Steam, it's a great buy for anyone who enjoys a Okay, here it is. Day of Defeat: Source is an okay game, but has a few flaws, namely damage, recoil, number of maps(not really a flaw, but it would be nice to see more maps), and so on. But, at the same time, it does what it is supposed to, which is being a semiaccurate WW2 game, and it does that pretty well. And for ten dollars off of Steam, it's a great buy for anyone who enjoys a good shooter.… Expand
  21. Alfonzz
    Oct 8, 2007
    6
    As Sean said, the gun recoil is a horrendous thing. Guns just dont fly up in the air like they are portrayed to do. The guns act like the weigh nothing so they fly up in the air when fired, this simply doesnt happen with a real gun. BTW you can shoot an MG42 while standing in real life. Despite this major flaw the game is pretty, and is worth getting if you can get it cheap.
  22. StevenM.
    Jun 10, 2007
    6
    Generally dull and extremely unrealistic. A terrible representation of the amazing source engine. Valve really put this game out fast and didn't concentrate on game play. Don't get me wrong, it's decent when you have nothing else to play, but compared to Red Orchestra, it does not hold up for mature and rational minded thinkers.
  23. SamJ.
    Aug 30, 2007
    6
    Its an ok game but its missing many of the old elements and there are many bugs on the maps i also find the maps to be little under designed. but in total its just a game which gets boring very quick.
  24. SeanS.
    Sep 16, 2007
    6
    This game is alright but ...... im troubled by the hit box and the gun recoiling way to much. Not only that, but there are many cheaters/togglers in DOD that deny it. Overall with out hacks and the trouble of the recoil. This game is okay. This graphic is good and the community also.
  25. MattiL.
    Jun 12, 2008
    6
    Graphics are nice, also sound is very nice, but the gameplay (hitting where you aim) is bad.
  26. Daves
    Nov 11, 2005
    5
    The graphics are beautiful but this game lacks in gameplay. The dynamic lighting can be annoying when it gets so sunny that you can't even see anything. All the guns' accuracy has been lowered, which is more realistic but annoying... you can unload a whole mag at an enemy with the mp40 or thompson from about 20 meters away and not hit him once. Also, the maps are entirely too The graphics are beautiful but this game lacks in gameplay. The dynamic lighting can be annoying when it gets so sunny that you can't even see anything. All the guns' accuracy has been lowered, which is more realistic but annoying... you can unload a whole mag at an enemy with the mp40 or thompson from about 20 meters away and not hit him once. Also, the maps are entirely too small and cluttered, and theres only 4 of them from what I remember.… Expand
  27. KevinH.
    May 11, 2006
    7
    Fun, but the Thompson is waaaayy too overpowering. it makes the game no fun.
  28. RickG.
    Jul 29, 2006
    6
    I know it's just a game, but everyone has to be getting tired of getting stuck in door jams, bottle tops, weeds, etc. etc. etc... Generally someone went out of their way to make the game as tedious as possible. Tedious is not fun. I think everyone is tired of getting shot through walls, around corners, etc. I never understood why I can be shot from someone that can see me, but I I know it's just a game, but everyone has to be getting tired of getting stuck in door jams, bottle tops, weeds, etc. etc. etc... Generally someone went out of their way to make the game as tedious as possible. Tedious is not fun. I think everyone is tired of getting shot through walls, around corners, etc. I never understood why I can be shot from someone that can see me, but I can't see them. I know there's some lag in online gaming, but come on already.… Expand
  29. AceB.
    Dec 31, 2007
    7
    The game is not as you see it in the trailers. When you see the trailers you see a real battle between the Allies and the Axis, but when you play it yourself you will notice people just go for the blood instead of the fun. People are more busy to kill each other like a DeathMatch than having real fun and try to live into the roles as Allied/Axis. However the whole idea is great, Allies vs. Axis.
  30. JonesR
    Mar 7, 2012
    5
    I never really liked Day of Defeat because there were a whole lot of WWII games that were released around the same time that did things so much better. The Source version doesn't feel like a vast improvement over the original game, but surprisingly you can still find an occasional populated server. I suppose if you need some basic old school WWII combat, this can fit the bill.
  31. tech-noir
    Sep 5, 2013
    5
    There is only one server in my region with a decent ping that plays some, but not all official maps. Tense and exciting moments are rare, with very little happening to create interesting engagements between the teams. Even with the mildly realistic gun physics, the kills are seldom satisfying.
  32. Illuminous
    Aug 29, 2011
    7
    There isn't much to say about this game really. Fast paced FPS at it's most simple level. Feels like one of the older MoH games but with a tad nicer graphics. Not alot of maps or other content but for the cheap price at which it can be bought, it shouldn't come as a big surprise.
  33. Simon8000
    Jan 28, 2013
    5
    One of my least favorite valve games. The classes are my main issue, the bazooka is actually designed for anti-infantry use and its way to overpowered, just get a few mediocre snipers, a bazooka and a MG in the vantage point and you have the game. The textures are low-res, the maps are medium at best, the two classed you actually get to play are almost the same, one with more power and oneOne of my least favorite valve games. The classes are my main issue, the bazooka is actually designed for anti-infantry use and its way to overpowered, just get a few mediocre snipers, a bazooka and a MG in the vantage point and you have the game. The textures are low-res, the maps are medium at best, the two classed you actually get to play are almost the same, one with more power and one with more aim. The MG is overpowered due to the ability to literally sit outside a base and be able to kill them all. The "source" engine seemed to fail in this game, overdone recoil, no real bullet physics, just straight shots with the MG so you can get a 1 hit kill headshot on the other side of the map.… Expand
  34. grazr
    Sep 13, 2012
    7
    2 words: "Counter-Strafe". Just like bunny hopping defined traditional CS gameplay, exploits like counter-strafe have defined competitive DoD. The skill curve is high and newbies will find it frustrating dying from experienced players who can anticipate player movement through a map and kill with indirect shots via bullet penetration through walls or well timed grenades. General gameplay2 words: "Counter-Strafe". Just like bunny hopping defined traditional CS gameplay, exploits like counter-strafe have defined competitive DoD. The skill curve is high and newbies will find it frustrating dying from experienced players who can anticipate player movement through a map and kill with indirect shots via bullet penetration through walls or well timed grenades. General gameplay is enjoyable however and you'll find yourself playing for several weeks each time you load it up nostalgicly.… Expand
  35. suneater
    Dec 17, 2012
    5
    Halfway between CS:S & TF2 in terms of gameplay, this was a stepping stone for me into the latter. It had it's time and place but the devs stopped updating it for a long time and then added achievements for whatever reason. Better WWII and team-based games have been released since so look elsewhere for your FPS needs.
  36. Aquazi
    Mar 8, 2013
    6
    I don't really like Source, weapons feel different, no wall shooting, too much interactive maps, no stopsound, and a terrible audio engine, you can never understand where enemy is. They took all the most challenging and cool things of 1.3 and downed them. Not a good successor.
  37. Shutdown
    Apr 30, 2017
    6
    Переход на движок Source просто убил игру. Ничего нового не добавили, а стрельбу угробили. В оригинальную игру играть в 100 раз приятнее чем в это...
  38. Axilley
    Jul 22, 2021
    7
    good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good good not bad choice
  39. HoganV
    Dec 23, 2018
    7
    Do you want a historically accurate FPS with a fan base? Try this gem out. The game is fast and precise, but feels like a husk of a game. No campaign, only 2 sides, and a couple maps. But for 10 bucks, i would recommend. Absolute steal on sale.
  40. Chubac
    May 13, 2020
    7
    Goes for the realistic aproach yet it still feels very fake and videogamey.

Awards & Rankings

44
#44 Best PC Game of 2005
3
#3 Most Discussed PC Game of 2005
85
#85 Most Shared PC Game of 2005

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
80

Generally favorable reviews - based on 22 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 22
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 22
  3. Negative: 0 out of 22
  1. IGN
    84
    I expect to be playing DoD a lot more than "Couterstrike: Source"... I recommend DoD:S to the multiplayer action crowd, but don't come crying to me when things start getting stale.
    Read full review
  2. PALGN
    85
    While the game still needs some patching, and is unfortunately not DoD as we know it, this is still an absolutely fantastic package; those after a new multiplayer shooter can’t really go wrong with this one. Oh, and expect this score to go up over time as Valve patches out various problems.
    Read full review
  3. GameSpot
    81
    While a lack of maps cuts into the game's value somewhat, Day of Defeat: Source still offers a satisfying and exciting experience for those who just can't get enough of World War II.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »