Worms Forts: Under Siege

Playing with real friends in this game is better than playing somebody online, as you get to have a real party spirit and distract each other in ways that simply aren't possible when the other players aren't in the same room. Not only this, but there's a ton to unlock and enrich your multiplayer games in months to come. Got friends? Get Worms!

The lack of any sort of on-line mode hurts the multiplayer game in terms of reaching a larger audience, but once you nail the new game mechanics, there’s definite fun to be had for up to four players.

Worms Forts has some of the best features straight from the old games, but you can’t help but notice that a few good things are still missing from the transition to 3D.

If you're after a genuinely funny game that features a massive challenge, then if you can overlook its obvious faults, Worms Forts: Under Siege will serve you well. The exploding refrigerators are just a bonus.

The forts concept has been added with precision, ensuring that it moulds into the game's structure almost seamlessly. Unfortunately, though, the gameplay is still painfully slow.

It will never replace the original, but as a bargain title, Under Siege! makes for a great little time waster. [Apr 2005, p.76]

The computer players take ages moving, and if you add more than one opponent for extra tactical depth, the problem is multiplied.

It’s still far from perfect – poor graphics, camera problems, AI all take their toll – but they took a bold step and it largely paid off.

The most glaring omission in Worms Forts: Under Siege! is some genuine enthusiasm.

Forts Under Siege might have enough reward on offer but the series is still relying on gamers to meet it halfway by investing ample time and patience in learning its demanding intricacies. [Dec 2004, p.112]

It appears as if Team 17 are eager to kill their Worms series with new additions. Gimmicks do nothing for a game like Worms.

Any improvements to the fun factor given to a multiplayer game is mostly down to all humans suffering from the same level of confusion given by a game that could do with being more like worms and less like a squeaking game of Crossbows & Catapults. More annoying than fun and not funny.

Crippled by a lack of online play and a horrible camera system. Yet despite the problems, the core game is so good that it's still worth playing, as long as you have human opponents to compete against.

I just wish it had that pick-up-and-go, addictive quality of its predecessors. [May 2005, p.104]

Top off this stubbornly shoddy gameplay with un-funny cutscenes and a glaring lack of online play and, well, there isn't much here to be super happy about. [Apr 2005, p.117]

This game actually slows down time. Its characters move at the speed of Elmer's glue. [May 2005, p.124]

You could play this and fight your desire to stop playing at every moment or you could play "Disgaea" and enjoy yourself. Your choice.

Instead of sticking to a formula that is for all intense purposes simplistic genius, Team 17 have decided to go for a game with a remarkably unnecessary amount of complexity.

An interesting idea that fails spectacularly. Not only does the central concept reduce each match to an almost painful war of attrition, but Team 17 seem to have concentrated so heavily on making its new gimmick work correctly that the rest of the game has fallen by the wayside.