Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45

 PC
User Score
8.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1300 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,091 out of 1300
  2. Mixed: 65 out of 1300
  3. Negative: 144 out of 1300
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. danielpatten
    Nov 5, 2006
    1
    ive had the game for monthsand its still not updated enough to play, 24 hours to wait on download of update is retarded. i wish i could get my money back, never buy from this company again, looks cool. but so what if your unable to play in a reasonable amount of time, guess critics didnt have to download the piece of junk
  2. SergeyS.
    Dec 20, 2006
    4
    Wow, what a disappointment. I was so wrong thinking this was another Brothers in Arms. Single player mode, e.g. "Training" is awful: AI is dumber than my hamster, no realism whatsoever. Multiplayer mode is a bit better, but you have to get up pretty early to get a good weapon, otherwise you're stuck with a bolt-action rifle that is awkward to use at best. Damage mode is very Wow, what a disappointment. I was so wrong thinking this was another Brothers in Arms. Single player mode, e.g. "Training" is awful: AI is dumber than my hamster, no realism whatsoever. Multiplayer mode is a bit better, but you have to get up pretty early to get a good weapon, otherwise you're stuck with a bolt-action rifle that is awkward to use at best. Damage mode is very realistic, too realistic if you ask me: a hit in a leg slows down your movement, a hit an an arm - you can't use your weapon. But now the question is, how the heck are you supposed to heal if the game has no medics and there's a fortified machine gun nest in front??? Pointless. The only thing I REALLY enjoyed, though, is being a machine-gunner myself: those tracers and ricochets, and plumes of dust when you hit a cement wall are impressive.… Expand
  3. gamer
    Oct 23, 2006
    1
    The lack of a good way to start playing leaves me in the dust. I had the game installed for over an hour and all that comes up on the screen is the Steam user account that i created over an hour ago. Will soon see after something gets downloading in which i have no idea what Steam is downloading.
  4. JA
    Oct 28, 2006
    0
    Gameplay is awful. The maps are too large. The bots are stupid. The "Iron sight mode", which was copied from other games, is ineffective. The scenery is plain and clearly little imagination was used in forming them. Tripwire should come up with something good, and stop this second-rate game.
  5. AdamM.
    Mar 25, 2006
    4
    This game was a step backward. DOD:S and CS:S are the benchmark and this fell well short.
  6. SunilH.
    Mar 25, 2006
    2
    Worst game evvver ... felt I was mislead by the promo vidio - bots and graphics are horrid.
  7. SerdarA.
    Mar 26, 2006
    0
    I pre-ordered this game thrusting steam would not put anything worthless in their system. This is by far the worst game I have ever played. It is a waste of time money and bandwidth. The movies and the screen shots looks great but that is not what you get in the game. Movement is slugish the graphics are based on the outdated Unreal engine (yes this is not a source engine game). And if I pre-ordered this game thrusting steam would not put anything worthless in their system. This is by far the worst game I have ever played. It is a waste of time money and bandwidth. The movies and the screen shots looks great but that is not what you get in the game. Movement is slugish the graphics are based on the outdated Unreal engine (yes this is not a source engine game). And if plan on playing a slodier you may forget that as well. the maps are huge and you "have to" drive something. and of course you are seeing everything from a 1x4 inch screen. The only people who will love this game are the snipers who like to camp in one position. I would have donated the money wasted on this game to a charity. at least it would have done some good. Now it is used by Tripwire to make more useless games... I w?ould have give -10 if I was given the option. Do not buy! Avoid like the plaque.… Expand
  8. DavidB.
    Mar 31, 2006
    4
    Most of the ratings here are by the staff in order to promote the game they will probley remove this comment. honestly this game is alot like any other ww2 fps the graphics are bad and could be greatly improved. the game play is better then expected but still lacks in areas. I dont think its worth the money.
  9. IanB.
    Apr 15, 2006
    3
    I bought this game with great anticipation, only to be greatly let down. First off both Day of Defeat and Call of Duty are light years ahead of this game, even Operation Flashpoint I would say has it up on this game. The grapics are mediocre at best and the game is choppy even offline with normal settings. The interface is not as easy as most first person shooters, the grenades handle I bought this game with great anticipation, only to be greatly let down. First off both Day of Defeat and Call of Duty are light years ahead of this game, even Operation Flashpoint I would say has it up on this game. The grapics are mediocre at best and the game is choppy even offline with normal settings. The interface is not as easy as most first person shooters, the grenades handle poorly. The only thing that the game offers differently than the other shooters is sneaking element - in which I would then recommend Operation Flashpoint or better Battle Field:1942, over this game. In short, I will never buy a game off Steam without viewing a demo of it first. This game comparably sucks!!!!… Expand
  10. JohnB.
    Apr 15, 2006
    2
    Compared to games of its caliber and goals, it falls short due to technical limitations. The idea of realism itself ends up become a shortcoming of the game, especially in the community, as it ends up being an excuse for certain gimmicks and gameplay features (or lack of them). I feel there was significant ambition, but too much for a game won out of a competition from a mod.
  11. MauryRhodes
    May 12, 2006
    0
    After 3 months of waiting to get the game running there is no one playing might as well go back to the mod and play.
  12. HankJ.
    May 15, 2006
    4
    Graphics are sub par, there are many other games out there, that do this genre' better than this one does.
  13. DeathSquad
    May 16, 2006
    1
    This game started off as a free mod for unreal tournament 2003. This only shows how greedy the creators are.
    In fact, you are paying $24.95 for a bloody modification. I wonder if Atari, Epic Games and Digital Extremes authorized this game to be sold on Steam. I mean, the engine, wich in fact was creaded by Digital Extremes and Atari, is with no doubt copyrighted.
    So, if you buy this    This game started off as a free mod for unreal tournament 2003. This only shows how greedy the creators are.
    In fact, you are paying $24.95 for a bloody modification. I wonder if Atari, Epic Games and Digital Extremes authorized this game to be sold on Steam. I mean, the engine, wich in fact was creaded by Digital Extremes and Atari, is with no doubt copyrighted.

    So, if you buy this game, you are breaking the law, unless they are authorized to sell it.    … Expand
  14. AlexB.
    May 6, 2006
    3
    Poor, bad graphics, slow irritating unrealistic difficult gamepley. Wasted my money.
  15. AdamM.
    May 9, 2006
    0
    This game is not in anyway a special game. It's graphics go back to the days of Half-Life 1, or even pre-Half-Life! Before I go on, we must remember... IT IS THE YEAR 2006, NOT 1997! The AI sucks, big time, it is worse than James Bond: Goldeneye on N64. Combat is really fake. I would recommend getting the best WWII game (PERIOD), which is Day of Defeat: Source! This game was aThis game is not in anyway a special game. It's graphics go back to the days of Half-Life 1, or even pre-Half-Life! Before I go on, we must remember... IT IS THE YEAR 2006, NOT 1997! The AI sucks, big time, it is worse than James Bond: Goldeneye on N64. Combat is really fake. I would recommend getting the best WWII game (PERIOD), which is Day of Defeat: Source! This game was a waste of $30! The worst game I have ever played!… Expand
  16. AnonymousMC
    Jun 18, 2006
    0
    Im still unable to play load times are really long I have to wait at least 15-20mins before i get to the server screen and another 20mins before it even deciedes to even show team select screen and about another 10mins before the map loads so don't waste you money.
  17. Kevweg
    Aug 12, 2006
    0
    Horrible game..The people who claim its realistic and close to the real thing are out to lunch..Throw a grenade in this game on the other side of 4 foot thick wall and the screen goes blank for 5 seconds..whatever...the whole thing is painfuly slow to load and then you will probably end up on a server with glitches and disconnects. the graphics are terrible and the movemnet is l;ike Horrible game..The people who claim its realistic and close to the real thing are out to lunch..Throw a grenade in this game on the other side of 4 foot thick wall and the screen goes blank for 5 seconds..whatever...the whole thing is painfuly slow to load and then you will probably end up on a server with glitches and disconnects. the graphics are terrible and the movemnet is l;ike something from 10 or 15 years ago..do not waste your money on this game...easily one of the worst first person shooter games ever..id give it lower then zero if i could.… Expand
  18. JoshuaGrove
    Aug 2, 2006
    0
    Need a T1 line to download this game. I bought the game in circuit city. CD doesn't have the game on it. You have to download 2GB to get it with "steam". I've been trying to download it for 6hours with no luck. Its stuck at 69% and keeps saying servers to busy.
  19. NickR.
    Aug 2, 2006
    1
    What a sorry excuse for a game. Even if I could look past the sorry excuse for a graphics engine there is not a single original idea. I've never played a game that I couldnt give at least an hour to prove itself fun and entertaining till now.
  20. RegisJ.
    Aug 3, 2006
    0
    Right off teh bat the game was horrid, controls at default were a nightmare and graphics wise... ...i don't wanna bother explaining.
  21. RumpelStieltzchen
    Aug 5, 2006
    0
    Shred it! Is this a game from 1998,or what?Stupid actions,zones,Bots,and,and,and.... looks like a flashpoint-cover. Forget it! No point!
  22. GordonF.
    Jan 14, 2007
    0
    Ladies and gentleman, I think we may be on to the biggest conspiracy of our generation. Apparently, I somehow missed the hypnotism that would've convinced me this game isn't the biggest piece of crap since Shaq Fu. From my sober mind I could observe this game even failed at realism. Apparently, a single smoke grenade can shroud an entire city, that's very impressive. Also, Ladies and gentleman, I think we may be on to the biggest conspiracy of our generation. Apparently, I somehow missed the hypnotism that would've convinced me this game isn't the biggest piece of crap since Shaq Fu. From my sober mind I could observe this game even failed at realism. Apparently, a single smoke grenade can shroud an entire city, that's very impressive. Also, I now can sympathise with all the lag the army have had to put up with throughout history. Well, if I've learned anything from this game, its that too much realism causes a hole in my wall shaped like a computer moniter. I feel grateful to have not fallen under this game's evil spell. My prayers are with those who have been wooed by it.… Expand
  23. HolmN.
    Feb 6, 2007
    4
    Good graphics very realistic, but very cumbersome to get a good server. Tank wars are dull. Not many people playing it looks, I gave this one up....
  24. Jens
    Apr 2, 2007
    3
    Don't buy this game if you are a serious gamer looking for a challenging and realistic game. It's neither realistic nor challenging. Instead of realism you have an extremely clumsy interface that takes control away from you and makes everyone equally bad. Except for the cheaters of course, which there are plenty of, since the game uses the flawed "VAC" anti-cheat system. I gave Don't buy this game if you are a serious gamer looking for a challenging and realistic game. It's neither realistic nor challenging. Instead of realism you have an extremely clumsy interface that takes control away from you and makes everyone equally bad. Except for the cheaters of course, which there are plenty of, since the game uses the flawed "VAC" anti-cheat system. I gave it 3 points for immersion and graphics (except for the animations, which are horrible).… Expand
  25. NapoleonA.
    Jun 13, 2008
    1
    Well, It's awful game. I really expected more.
  26. RyanB.
    Jun 28, 2008
    2
    This game people rant and rave about, well i just bought it and I see nothing to rant about, Yes the tank wars are good but other then that the registry is "Terrible" I do not recommed buying this game if it is priced over $5 USD.
  27. MichaelsS.
    Sep 5, 2008
    0
    Horrible game, With Horrible Missions and Graphics. Worst 10$ spent on any software i ever spent.
  28. BN
    Mar 16, 2009
    2
    Unintuitive controls, a game trying to be to realistic, the way the game balances teams, basicly scramble of who ever can click on it first, usually leaves you stuck for choice making u fodder usually with a rifle, dont even give u a pistol! and then some idiot usually who runs off n dies alot or shoots you in the back with the nice powerfull gun... maybe they was wondering if it actually Unintuitive controls, a game trying to be to realistic, the way the game balances teams, basicly scramble of who ever can click on it first, usually leaves you stuck for choice making u fodder usually with a rifle, dont even give u a pistol! and then some idiot usually who runs off n dies alot or shoots you in the back with the nice powerfull gun... maybe they was wondering if it actually works seeings as they die so much n dont kill anything??? rotating class's would improve gameplay alot! It was on offer for 2.99 and i still feel like i wasted my money and should have gone n gotten icecream.… Expand
  29. TravisS.
    Jun 25, 2009
    0
    This game just doesn't have what it takes to really make you feel in the war, crappy aiming, no support for new players like making it easier for people who are new, overall just crap, more experienced players just take advantage over new players because they can't aim with that shitty aim system.
  30. BrentS
    Dec 18, 2006
    3
    One would truly think a game this smelly would had to of been cobbled together in the confines of a Romanian cave and smuggled out to the consumer by Uzbekistanian Gypsies, via a drunken donkey caravan...not uploaded directly to your PC through "Day of Defeat" affiliated Steam. I mean wow condom less sex with a Bosnian hooker couldn
Page:

Awards & Rankings

34
#34 Best PC Game of 2006
3
#3 Most Discussed PC Game of 2006

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 22 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 22
  2. Mixed: 1 out of 22
  3. Negative: 1 out of 22
  1. CPUGamer
    80
    I absolutely love the attention Tripwire has given to the small details in the game.
    Read full review
  2. IGN
    85
    There's very little gameyness in RO and a whole lot of gritty crawling along the ground so you can flank over to that machine gunner and allow your team to advance to the next spawn point objective.
    Read full review
  3. GameSpot
    79
    Red Orchestra is an enjoyable, team-based online shooter for those who like the Battlefield-style games but want a more technical and realistic experience.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »