Metareview: Brother in Arms: Earned in Blood
by James Ransom-Wiley 
{ Oct 6th 2005 at 1:00PM }
The sequel to Brother in Arms: Road to Hill 30 is out now. The first game, released only seven
months ago, received glowing reviews from critics, but for the most part, was slept on by the gaming public. No doubt,
fans of Road to Hill 30 are eager to see how the sequel, Brother in Arms: Earned in Blood, has
improved upon the original, but if you missed this series the first time out, be sure to give Earned in Blood
an honest look.
Choice quotes from the critics:
-
1UP: 95/100 "Thanks to a potent combination of ingenious tactical A.I., flawless squad controls, and terrifying audio/visuals, these games are a perfect balance of realism and playability, without resorting to heavy-handed scripting and the predictable linearity in level designs found in its contemporaries. In fact, Blood is so good, it actually manages to put its predecessor to shame."
-
Team Xbox: 96/100 "In terms of presentation, technical gameplay, graphics, and audio, it's nearly impossible to rise above Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood in any area."
-
GameSpy: 100/100 "While Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood feels a bit too much like its predecessor in many ways, that's like saying "The Godfather 2" was a bit too similar to "The Godfather."
[via Metacritic]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
fraeone @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
These metareviews are nice, but maybe you could pick a more diverse group of websites to quote from? Those three reviewers all work for the same guy.
1337Thespian @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Haha. IGN gave it an 8.0.
/Go IGN
jimmy @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
the first game was good, not great. The levels were kind of unremarkable, no wild large scale call of duty stuff. T
The strategic combat was cool but it definitly wasnt a mind blowing game.
Matt Hayes @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
Did EA recently purchase Gamespy, or did they just comp them hookers per the industry standard bribe methodology?
DG @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
100/100? This game is utterly perfect, in every single way? There isn't a single flaw in the entire game? It is going to be a timeless classic, never to be forgotten? This is a sequel, yet it is, according to GameSpy, completely perfect. That's amazing.
I can think of just three completely perfect games, and (embarrasingly) they're each sequels, but revolutionary in their own respective rights: Mario 64, Super Mario Bros. 3, and Street Fighter II Turbo. That's the list for me. But I guess Brother in Arms: Earned in Blood is on that level. Amazing.
The Wookiee @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
I enjoyed the first Brothers In Arms; however, the game simply fell short in its breadth. #3 makes some good points about the game, but I disagree on the level design, as I feel that it captured more realism than CoD.
One aspect about BIA that I hated is the multiplayer. Simply put, it was god awful. Terrible gameplay and an even worse means by which to connect to a game.
By merit (or lack thereof) of the multiplay, I would probably rate the game of 7 out of 10. I have yet to pick up the expansion, so I am very curious to see if the multiplayer has improved at all.
Kevin Parrott @ Dec 18th 2005 10:00PM
It's better in every way.
I've only been playing a couple of days, and the enhanced enemy AI makes the Germans stay on the move. If you stay still they'll have you surrounded in no time. It's somewhat frustrating, but you'll find yourself shaking your head at how the enemy AI seems so much like you're fighting against human enemies. Edge-of-your-seat moments are plenty. The framerate gets a bit choppy at times, but not enough to ruin your game.
Gearbox fixed everything that was wrong with the first BIA, and added even more for your money. Co-op skirmish mode, improved multiplayer, and a better single-player storyline. There's a lot of replayability here. So far I only have a problem with some of the hokey voice acting. Hopefully that will improve with the next BIA installment.
In short, you'll have a much better time with this one than you had with BIA.
And at what point did an 8.2 become a bad rating? In Nitpicky Bitterland, maybe, but here on Earth 8.2 is still a very good game rating.