The History Channel: Battle for the Pacific

 Xbox 360
Metascore
35

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 11 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 11
  2. Mixed: 3 out of 11
  3. Negative: 8 out of 11
Buy Now
Buy on
  1. GameZone
    55
    The History Channel implementation, level setup and graphic selections are A+ choices; it’s the execution that tanks the experience.
  2. GamesRadar+
    40
    There are a ton of fine shooters hitting shelves this year that are good enough to go down in history. It would be a shame to waste your money paying full price for this heap, which instead takes history down with it.
  3. IGN
    45
    The History Channel: Battle for the Pacific isn't necessarily an atrocious game, but it just isn't that fun and brings so very little to the table.
  5. GameSpot
    20
    World War II shooters simply don't get worse than Battle for the Pacific.
  6. PGNx Media
    60
    Battle for the Pacific's presentation isn't bad but it's gameplay has too many flaws to be recommendable. These flaws become even more apparent in light of the increased FPS competition on the Xbox 360. Skip this.
  7. Official Xbox Magazine
    30
    When a game's only achievement is that it's a better World War II shooter than "Hour of Victory"--and just barely--it's time to pack it up and just go home. [Feb 2008, p.79]
    All this publication's reviews
  8. Planet Xbox 360
    51
    With the wealth of FPS options for 360 owners, Battle For The Pacific is hardly worth a passing thought.
  9. Game Revolution
    25
    Ultimately, though, the biggest blow against the game is its brevity. You shouldn't have trouble clearing its single-player mode in two or three hours.
  10. Game Chronicles
    40
    Just too little and far too late. The WWII genre isn’t exactly short on titles these days nor is the FPS genre. If you plan on releasing a game in either (and especially both) you had better bring your “A” game.
  11. Xbox World 360 Magazine UK
    20
    As welcome as getting trench-foot. [June 2008, p.85]
    All this publication's reviews
  12. Official Xbox Magazine UK
    20
    A black mark for the History Channel. [June 2008, p.72]
    All this publication's reviews

Awards & Rankings

82
#82 Most Discussed Xbox 360 Game of 2007

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
5.9

Mixed or average reviews- based on 22 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 22
  2. Mixed: 2 out of 22
  3. Negative: 10 out of 22
  1. BulletPeople
    Dec 21, 2016
    8
    By no means a triple A production with cadres of designers and programmers, The History Channel: Battle for the Pacific nonetheless manages toBy no means a triple A production with cadres of designers and programmers, The History Channel: Battle for the Pacific nonetheless manages to be a great deal of fun and offers several innovative ideas and flourishes that others would do well to copy.

    Cons:You can gripe about a somewhat stuttery framerate that happens often. The sergeant and other team members you follow can get stuck and do nothing until you try something to wake them up like press on forward past his stationary form. There's no friendly fire on your fellow soldiers. Some others have complained that aiming is difficult but I wonder if that particular challenge is not intentional, as it gives you the feel of trying to bring the 9 lb M-1 rifle or a 31 lb Browning machine gun to bear on a target. Likewise, lack of boss battles is a net plus to me because using a video game cliche like bosses really has no place in a game based on history.

    Pros: Something about the design of this game just makes it all work to make it feel like what it must have been like for real. There are things I've never seen in any other game.
    - You are constantly chasing someone who is giving orders, who moves when you might prefer to stay because there are other objectives he has in mind, and who sometimes recklessly plows guns blazing into enemy fire. There's a saying "you can't manage people into battle, you have to lead them." It's a cliche that someone has to lead the charge, to go over the perimeter first, and rally the troops to take the hill. We see that in this game, maybe not done to perfection, but done in a way that makes you realize that's what it must have been like. You may want to stick around to get that last of 3 snipers that opened up on you but the sergeant is going around the bend yelling at you to keep up. If you lag too far behind you restart the level, so there's lots of incentive to keep up.
    - Try as you might, you won't be killing all or even most of the enemy. In fact, if you don't keep up you can enter a firefight, duck in shame, and when you finally get nerve to peek out again your comrades have already mopped up and are, once again, moving on and calling you to catch up.
    - Sometimes you're just trying to save your skin and basically ignore everything else but to follow your sergeant. So just as in real life there's no artificial goal to kill every enemy. It's good enough to make it onto the beach, past the falling artillery, through the machine gun fire, and over the embankment to safety.
    - Flanking the enemy produces the most satisfying moment in a FPS I've ever experienced. They don't scatter in 8 directions but are simply taken out by your machine gun in a line.
    - Your path through the battlefield takes twists, turns, backtracks--all of the things you'd expect in the fog of war. When your sergeant hauls off to the left fork in one of the many trenches don't be surprised if you run into a dead end and come back. And now you've finally taken the position? Good for you, but you might give it back in two minutes and have to retake it later.
    - Don't expect to take your time behind that mounted gun the sergeant asked you to take over. Before they stop coming at you he may call you off of it--time to move out.

    If you are at all willing to forgive less than state-of-the-art mechanics for a unique experience, try this game.    … Full Review »
  2. glenrod
    Mar 16, 2011
    9
    this game is as close as you can get to a real life world war sim, everything from the controlls to the graphics are quite simply amazing. thethis game is as close as you can get to a real life world war sim, everything from the controlls to the graphics are quite simply amazing. the gameplay is absolutely phenomenal and the pace is incredible too, this has set the bar for world war 2 shooters, one that maybe can never be matched in the near future. any call of duty fans that have not played this need to trade in their copies for this as it is an incredible piece of software.

    from bone shattering explosions to next gen set pieces, this is a game that NO first person shooter fan should avoid.    … Full Review »
  3. [Anonymous]
    Jan 29, 2008
    1
    Activision should be ashamed releasing such half-baked crap for anything more than $19.99. Thank god I manage a video game store and can Activision should be ashamed releasing such half-baked crap for anything more than $19.99. Thank god I manage a video game store and can steer shooter fans away from this horrible game. If you are willing to subject yourself to trench level, jungle path level, then the same trench level for 10 levels, then you will complete the game in only a few hours. I bailed after 7 levels when the commanding officer, who leads you by the nose got stuck on the environment in a trench level. The mission fails if you are too far ahead or behind this officer. It's tempting to deny this game any points because I wouldn't buy it for $1, but there were a few stupid shooting gallery/fish in a barrel moments that felt arcade cathartic. I'd hardly call it history though. Quite possibly a new low in FPS gaming.… Full Review »
See all user reviews »