The bimbo of graphic adventure games: both pretty and stupid... When the puzzle solutions aren't illogical, they're horrifically repetitive. [Dec 2003, p.129]

Delivers the best World War II real-time gaming experience to date. [Aug 2003, p.88]

The missions are interesting and, let’s face it, every once in a while, it’s a cathartic blast to wade into the middle of swarms of bad guys and teach them the folly of opposing truth, justice, and the American way. [Mar 2002, p.91]

If only the camera system were half as responsive as the bad guys are. [July 2003, p.89]

You'd think jumping would be precisely tuned in a game about accuracy, but here, it feels like a crapshoot. [May 2004, p.85]

The dated visuals won't grab you, but the game's depth keeps things interesting if not addicting. [June 2003, p.98]

An exciting mud-splattering ride, a comprehensive off-track world, and an approachable price point. [Jan 2003, p.126]

A good game, if not ground-breaking like the original. [Jan 2003, p.108]

A diamond in the rough. [Oct 2005, p.80]

Lame story, lame racing, lame A.I. - lame game. [July 2003, p.86]

What's worse than a mediocre piece of shareware? Answer: a $30 retail game that looks and plays like a mediocre piece of sharware. [Oct 2004, p.81]

Sacred is about as close as a game can get to being "Diablo" without getting lawyers involved. [July 2004, p.73]

Easily the best implementation of a major comic-book character in a game yet... Finally, a game that lets you club your enemies with other enemies. [Sept 2003, p.98]

There's no base building or tedious resource harvesting. Instead, there's tedious resource trafficking. [July 2004, p.74]

The A.I. remains pretty predictable, so most of the single-player challenge is due to the A.I.'s larger armies. Worst of all, there's no PBEM. With battles lasting for hours, multiplayer games are just too difficult to coordinate and play.

Dying repeatedly to learn the magic path can get tiresome, even in a short game. [Feb 2003, p.81]

A complete game experience that's compelling, if sometimes unwieldy. [August 2002, p.79]

If simulating multiple seasons in a sitting is your dream, this is your game. [Aug 2005, p.85]

It believably simulates the pro game, and for a text game, that's the most important thing. [June 2004, p.81]

It’s unfortunate, but the experience – at least for now – is awkward, plodding, and, worst of all, inconsistent. [Mar 2002, p.76]

Trying to please hardcore and casual strategy gamers, Cossacks II satisfies neither. [Aug 2005, p.87]

If only the bugs weren't as deep as its design. [July 2002, p.68]

It has the same kind of addictive magic, suspense, and excitement that the X-Com games had, with the bonus of devious human minds in place of stilted A.I. [June 2003, p.88]

Offers exhilarating combat in a fantastic setting. [Feb 2003, p.85]

Just like the last Blitzkrieg. No, really. [Feb 2005, p.89]

I found myself really disappointed by this unwelcome shift away from the giddy worm-versus-worm combat of earlier games. [Feb 2003, p.88]

It's a maddeningly beautiful game filled with the tedium of being an observer more than a player. [Feb 2004, p.81]

Although the horror element here suffers from one-trick-pony-itis, I was, over time, compelled enough by the story to keep going-not just because I had to, but because I was kinda interested to see how things turned out.