User Score
8.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 19 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 14 out of 19
  2. Negative: 1 out of 19
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
  1. Feb 14, 2022
    5
    Back in the day I could see me giving this a chance but nowadays this is a hard pass because of the non existent save system. Should you die you start right back at the start of a mission and you can't speed up the game to speed run it to make up for lost time. It's a painful memorization game and it didn't take me long to become bored of the repetitive do-overs. Back in the day as aBack in the day I could see me giving this a chance but nowadays this is a hard pass because of the non existent save system. Should you die you start right back at the start of a mission and you can't speed up the game to speed run it to make up for lost time. It's a painful memorization game and it didn't take me long to become bored of the repetitive do-overs. Back in the day as a youngster this game would have occupied me differently but nowadays with the evolution of games and choices this one belongs in the past. Expand
  2. PierreC.
    Jun 2, 2002
    6
    La conversion n'est pas à la hauteur...

Awards & Rankings

89
#89 Most Shared PS2 Game of 2002
Metascore
67

Mixed or average reviews - based on 23 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 23
  2. Negative: 2 out of 23
  1. 69
    If you can look past the hampered, out-of-date graphics, sticky, annoying controls, and crummy framerate, you'll enjoy it.
  2. A very amusing and well-designed first-person shooter that suffers from outdated graphics and an unfriendly control scheme, but also remains surprisingly engaging.
  3. Game Informer
    70
    Unfortunately, the game looks a tad dated and isn't quite as smooth as its PC counterpart. Great action, but mediocre production. [Dec 2001, p.95]