A beautiful RTS with solid single- and multiplayer gameplay. What more can you ask for? [Oct 2004, p.76]

You never quite get past the feeling that there are a half-dozen better shooters you could be playing...There's just no reason to play a shooter with this many problems. [Oct 2004, p.80]

When it all comes together, Joint Ops is a great game that offers a solid combat experience on a scale far beyond anything in the "Battlefield" series. [Sept 2004, p.74]

A fairly standard action game redeemed by some true suspense and fear. [Oct 2004, p.79]

Great if you like beautifully rendered landscapes, not so great if you like good A.I. and usuable controls. [Sept 2004, p.72]

Works so well in third-person mode that it makes you wonder why it wasn't offered earlier. [Sept 2004, p.70]

For casual gamers and casual Harry Potter fans - diehards may be let down. [Nov 2004, p.82]

Forget what you learned in previous games, because it won't apply here. [Aug 2004, p.76]

It looks like, well, a badly ported PS2 game with washed-out colors, graphical glitches, and only average textures and modeling. This, along with the appallingly bad driving sequences, horrible characters, plentiful cliches, and cringe-inducing dialogue, proves that unlike "Splinter Cell," not all console/PC marriages are made in heaven. [Sept 2004, p.77]

A good adaptation of the movie, but the controls could be easier. [Sept 2004, p.76]

In spite of any number of small improvements, the new game feels more stale and by-the-numbers than the first one. [Aug 2004, p.78]

We're all still playing this game night and day, long after the review is over. We love it, and sadly, we don't have much of a life outside of it. Thank God there aren't more MMO's like this one. [Aug 2004, p.72]

Honestly expands upon the original with four new campaigns that provide the absorbing single-player experience the original lacked. Unfortunately, some stability problems keep it from being perfect.

There isn't much variety in character appearance, which is disappointing, since other games are offering an incredible amount of customizability. [Aug 2004, p.74]

Despite the patient sneaking this game encourages, Contracts seems a little rushed. [Aug 2004, p.73]

There's never a sense that you could make your way through a level based purely on your own sense of ingenuity and improvisation. [July 2004, p.76]

The truest and most gratifying shooter since "Doom." [July 2004, p.69]

A well-played game of Winning Eleven 7 gives the impression of having watched a TV soccer match and controlled the results. It's that good. [Oct 2004, p.84]

You'll frequently dodge the oafish enemies instead of fighting. [Mar 2004, p.84]

Considering their utter lack of intelligence, it'd be more accurate to name these guys "Inbreed." [July 2004, p.70]

With a poor presentation and poor gameplay, War Times feels like an overpriced piece of budgetware that's destined to languish in bargain bins until its desiccated corpse turns to powder and is blown from our memory. [Aug 2004, p.82]

A good historical RTS, desite flawed infantry and some puzzlelike maps. [July 2004, p.71]

A seriously intended and well-made game and its heart is in the right place, but I got tired of it sooner than I expected. [May 2004, p.90]

The gamplay in this game about serial murders is even more horrific than its story line. [Feb 2004, p.87]

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

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

Howsabout a nice whack upside the head with a tire iron for a horrific save-game feature that is simultaneously terribly conceived and idiotically implemented?

If Ubisoft can fix the slew of multiplayer problems, the company just might have a real classic on its hands. [June 2004, p.84]