Shadow Ops: Red Mercury

The biggest problem is that Shadow Ops apparent efforts at achieving a cinematic feel have fallen well flat and the FMV is disappointingly bland.

While it doesn't have the style of "Halo" or the myriad of gameplay choices like "Splinter Cell," Shadow Ops is a decent throwback to simpler shooter times when running and gunning was all that is to be expected. [Aug 2004, p.77]

An average shooter through and through. The gameplay is average and so are the graphics. There isn't anything new or exciting happening in this game, but mostly things we have seen done better in other titles.

Yes, it has some glaring AI problems, some repetitive and overly simplistic gameplay aspects. And yeah, one of the final cut-scenes, where our hero lands on a speeding train, is about as PlayStation One graphics as it gets, I still enjoyed the game.

It could've been a good title if it'd been tweaked more, especially in paying attention to the AI driving the opposition. But without that love, this is just another 'seen it 15 times this year' title.

A reliable, well-designed and fun shooter title to provide you with some intense gameplay both in single player and multiplayer versions.

With its no nonsense game play I recommend this title for those bored of the Tom Clancy approach to gaming.

The lack of a quick save or manual save takes a great deal of enjoyment out of the game.

The game sadly plays as a barely mediocre firefight.

Arguably the most cinematic shooter on the market, and though the gameplay is flawed in some respects, the lengthy, engrossing single-player campaign is still worth the price of admission. The offline multiplayer component can provide a few small kicks as well, but Xbox Live owners should beware, as online play is dodgy, to say the least.

A little frustrating, a little predictable, but like many a Hollywood blockbuster, it's a thrill ride worth taking.

Starts off strong with a great story, flawless controls, and some initially impressive graphics, but the more you play the more the graphics start to reveal their flaws, as does the gameplay, when AI glitches and environmental bugs start to pop up and ruin the experience.

The campaign missions can be pretty intense at times--but the underlying action itself lacks the sort of visceral punch that shooters ought to have. It's not that big of an issue in the heavily scripted single-player levels, but Shadow Ops' clunky multiplayer gameplay significantly suffers for it.

A linear approach to design and the tired reliance on ubiquitously placed exploding barrels will raise red flags for some, but I'm always down for an intense march through a shooting gallery. [July 2004, p.73]

Fans of the soldier shooting genre are better off sticking with the current and upcoming Tom Clancy games than looking at the weak shadow of a game that SORM ultimately turns out to be.

Just another average game that tries well but just doesn't stand out amongst the myriad of great shooters out on the market.

Probably the most disappointing aspect of the game is the way that it deals with the mechanics and animation of shooting. There are few indications that you are hitting your target aside from the enemy actually falling down.

Perhaps the single biggest fault of Shadow Ops is that the game simply offers nothing new to the genre and lacks any personality.

While the action is intense the first time you take control, this coolness becomes a novelty after a while. The missions are real basic and offer little flavor once you've played through the first few levels.

A few interesting urban levels, cinematic cutscenes and kickass surround sound aren't enough to save Shadow Ops from being decidedly mediocre. It isn't horribly bad, but it isn't good either.

There's always potential in the realistic shooter, and on paper, Shadow Ops seems pretty strong. But that crucial spark that separates the good from the great is mission in action.

Pure, mindless action hindered by a couple of dud rounds.

A merely passable game...Why have a White Castle hamburger when you can have a juicy steak? [Aug 2004, p.103]

An average single-player game with competent but not brilliant multiplayer modes tacked onto the side. [Aug 2004, p.106]