MPG:
"Battle for the Pacific further knocks the History Channel brand down a notch on consoles, and yes that's after two Civil War titles that were equally terrible. If the network wants to attract younger viewers, then they'll also have to accept that they need to put forth the financial backing as well. Why not license Call of Duty?"
When gamers think about first person shooter games, there’s a slew of titles that instantly come to mind. These games place the player in the action and they become immersed in the game with heart-pounding gameplay dynamics. Sure, there’s a ton of great first person shooter games out there, but there’s a lot of companies that have tried to cash in on first person shooters. In other words, for every good first person shooter game out there, there’s a bad first person shooter game. On this list, are the worst of the worst when it comes to first person shooters.
CheatCC writes: "Quick, answer these two questions. Name the one genre that has saturated the market. If you answered the 'first person shooter' then you're correct. Okay, now for the next question. What particular historical period has provided the source material for this genre more than any other? If you answered "World War II" you're correct yet again. Now, surely developer Cauldron must have asked themselves the same questions. Why have did they ignore the clear signs that the market could do without another WWII shooter?"
IGN's review for The History Channel: Battle for the Pacific.
Score 4.5/10
