Home
Twitter
RSS
Newsletter
Chris Sell
09 Apr, 2005

Full Spectrum Warrior Review

PS2 Review | Pandemic's squad-based strategy game hits the PS2.
As many may already know, Full Spectrum Warrior was originally designed to teach military personnel the fundamentals of MOUT (Military Operations in Urban Terrain). In fact, you know you’re not playing your typical game right from the start as the mandatory tutorial will take you around 45mins to complete. You take on the role of commander of two squads of four soldiers each which consist of a rifleman, a grenadier, and an automatic gunner. All of the orders that you will give are team-based and you’ll never be able to split a team or command an individual soldier to do something. You can order your team to move to a new location, fire at targets in a particular direction, or to fire a grenade or smoke, but they will actually carry out the orders without any control on your part. There are some minor variations to these orders such as specifying that the team watch for attacks from a given direction while moving or that they lay down covering fire in a designated area, but overall you are working with a pretty small command set.

The controls are simple with simple button presses allowing to you switch teams, move your squad, cancel orders or order your team to take cover. The right stick controls the camera while the Left shoulder button zooms. The right shoulder button displays the 3D 'fog of war', which blurs the area your team is not covering at that particular moment. This means should enemies appear in this blurred area, they aren't visible to your squad. Your GPS is a valuable tool. It shows a top down map of your surroundings, the position of any known enemies and your mission objectives. The square button will bring up your firing cursor. This is a yellow circle that you can move over your target and then instruct your squad by pressing X to fire upon anything that falls within your present target. Holding the square button will allow you to bring up grenades which include frag, M203 grenade launcher and smoke grenades which can be selected between using the D pad.

In addition to simple squad control, there are also more advanced commands you can issue such as 'bounding', which is the safest way to move through unknown enemy territory. This is where one solider provides covering fire while one other moves into another position, and then vice versa. Ordering suppression fire is simple. You just simply need to put the firing cursor over the enemies to be suppressed and then hold down the X button. This allows your team to fire constantly on the enemy meaning that they stay ducked with their heads down. This allows you to move your other team in safety and is one of the most important tactics that you need to learn in Full Spectrum Warrior and proper use is key to success, especially as suppression fire burns through your ammo at a much faster rate than anything else.

Watch out, GRENADE!

Watch out, GRENADE!
Close
Gameplay is essentially about moving from one protected location to the next, alternating between your teams as one moves and the other provides covering fire. Full Spectrum Warrior was originally a piece of software developed as a training aid, so it is designed to reinforce the use of proper tactics through repetition. Each mission boils down to a series of enemy encounters designed to make you use cover as you advance and to force you to use your squads to protect each other until one of them can maneuver and flank the enemy so that you're in a position to attack successfully. If one of your teams or the enemy is in a covered position, they are marked with shield icons over their heads and they are completely and utterly safe from direct fire. You can't take shots at bobbing heads or hope for lucky shots in this game, being under cover really does mean you're under cover as far as the game is concerned and your job is to work out the best course of action for each tactical situation. Because of this, the game is more like a playing through a series of tactical based puzzles rather than the shooter many may expect from this. Play too aggressively or play to risky and your squad will end up dead. While this is an important fact to drum into the heads of soldiers, alot of gamers may find this rather limiting to the gameplay. While you can occasionally get within range to drop a frag grenade onto the enemy, 9 out of 10 times you simply have to find a way to flank them.

There are two difficulty levels in Full Spectrum Warrior. The first difficulty is pretty easy and it shouldn’t take you longer than 5-8 hours to beat the game. The second difficulty is thankfully a good deal tougher as the amount of enemies is increased and the game is less forgiving of your mistakes. As an added bonus for PS2 owners, the PS2 version of Full Spectrum Warrior has some extra missions the Xbox version doesn't have. Unfortunately it seems they have removed the original Army version which could be unlocked in the Xbox version by using a cheat code. The Army version added some much needed replay value to Full Spectrum Warrior as the campaign mode is over a little too quickly. The Army version played much differently from the console version with the controls being changed around a bit and the overall speed of the game seems much slower. Rather than controlling two teams of four soldiers you’d actually control over nine soldiers in total, with an extra soldier at your disposal that you can move between your alpha and bravo team. The Army version was more customizable than the console version as you could alter enemy aggression, civilian aggression, wind speed, troop skill levels and even the numbers of enemies you’ll face. The Army version also had a greater number of civilians roaming the streets. The Army version was a much more difficult game than the console version is and is what I feel what the game should have been like.

Taking cover behind the car

Taking cover behind the car
Close
Full Spectrum Warrior is also online compatible with a pretty standard co-op mode. Here you and another person can play through the entire single player campaign. Each person controls one fire team so basically your work load is cut in half and is a better game for it I feel. It's in co-op where Full Spectrum Warrior is best. But while the co-op mode is fun for a while, there are only so many times you can play the same single player missions.

Graphically the game is pretty solid, and while not on par with the Xbox version, everything looks pretty much as it should do. The textures as always suffer the most, but the levels in shape and design are of equal standard. The animations of your squad members are lifelike and believable. Admittedly, the environments throughout the game don't have a great deal of variety to them, but they are certainly authentic to the setting and feature some impressive atmospheric effects like the swirling winds of a sandstorm found on one of the later levels. Full Spectrum Warrior's audio is arguably the strongest area of the game. Voice acting fills the game and always sounds believable be it from officer commands at the start of a mission or banter from your squad during the game. Gunfire and explosions all sound suitably meaty while a great music score runs throughout the game (even if it does get a little repetitive after a while).

Despite my complaints, Full Spectrum Warrior is actually a decent little game. While the game is overly linear, pulling off a successful maneuver is a very rewarding experience. It's just the fact that Full Spectrum Warrior has wasted its potential that saddens me. It promises tactical warfare but due to its strict rules it actually delivers a puzzle game dressed up in guns and grenades. It has some thrills and fun gaming moments, especially in online co-op, but they don't last sadly. The game gets repetitive so it isn't likely you will want to play it through more than once. The rules of Full Spectrum Warrior are strict, so expect a good amount of trial and error. There's also a delay between telling your men to do something and them actually doing the bloody thing. This pause often means the difference between life and death when you're trying to reorganize which can become annoying. The difficulty level is way too low, even the harder setting is below what it should have been set at. Random enemy spawning in the single player campaign could have spiced things up in this respect but it's little more than a exercise for learning where people are and dealing with them accordingly. A multiplayer versus mode could have been good though it's hard to see how it could work under such strict rules. It's worth picking up cheap as it's fun at least once through in co-op online and it's nice to see a game try something a little different. It's just a shame the actual game isn't more like the deeper, more realistic 'Army Mode' extra found in the Xbox version and not the limited, linear one we have here.
The Score
An enjoyable game held back by its lifespan and limited gameplay. Lets hope that an idea with such potential won't be wasted again if ever there is a sequel.
Looking to buy this game right now? PALGN recommends www.Play-Asia.com.

Related Full Spectrum Warrior Content

Binge & Purge: Money! Money! Money!
08 Oct, 2004 THQ wants your money and it's all good - unless you actually already paid for the game. Think publishers really care? I think some will sell your mother in packaging if they could...
Full Spectrum Warrior Review
08 Jul, 2004 What do you get when you mix a real time strategy game with a squad-based shooter? Full Spectrum Warrior.
Full Spectrum Warrior Preview
30 Nov, 2003 Hands on Impressions of the game based on early code.
10 Comments
8 years ago
woah! looks like fun! although that's the problem with all the good looking games. They tend to be a bit too short.
8 years ago
Just get it on xbox if you can. The game deserves more than 6.5 imo. I guess the gameplay is an acquired taste, but it's definately good.
8 years ago
Yeah, I love it. Nothing like sending 8 soldiers towards one crazy arab with an RPG.
8 years ago
mrcivic wrote
Just get it on xbox if you can. The game deserves more than 6.5 imo. I guess the gameplay is an acquired taste, but it's definately good.
Well I would probably give the Xbox version a 7.0/7.5 for the better graphics/sound/control, but both games are far too short and too limited to deserve anything more no matter how much I actually enjoyed the game.
8 years ago
Oh come on, Wind Waker was annoyingly short, but I doubt you gave it such a low score. And what do you mean by the game being 'limited' ?
8 years ago
GTPod wrote
Oh come on, Wind Waker was annoyingly short, but I doubt you gave it such a low score. And what do you mean by the game being 'limited' ?
I already said in the review. By limited I mean there's only really one way of doing things. This then results in trial and error gameplay that more often than not simply involves flanking the enemy until you have a clear shot. The game doesn't do alot else and there's so much more that could have been done:

Grouping and Custom team sizes: You should be able to send a group of one or two soldiers off and then leave the other six in a single group to draw fire, or create 4 pairs and move them individually, it'd certainly give more oppertunities for larger scale battles with more ways to move.

Snipers: A sniper in at least one team would be nice. They could function like the rangers and be able to shoot enemies under cover or in building windows as long as they arent under fire.

Proper destructable environments: Enemies should retreat to buildings when outnumbered. To expose their defence, you then could send an engineer behind him and blow the whole wall up, whilst the rest of your team is covering him.

Possibly have a roster of different soldiers with certain characteristics and ratings and create your personalized Bravo and Alpha team ala Rainbow Six, you could then make a different team to suit each situation. Snipers would be useless for indoor missions but valuable for larger outdoor ones.

Some tank missions would have been nice too, they could have worked in a very similar way to the normal game.

NIGHT and DAY missions would have been nice too.

Don't get me wrong, I really do like the game. I like the way it plays and I like the fact it's something a bit different, I just feel they could have done a whole lot more with it had they spent another 12months on it or something. If the sequel adds some variety, gives you more to do and allows you use other tactics other than 'supress enemy with Alpha, flank enemy with Bravo, Kill enemy' i'll be first in line to preorder it.

Oh, and Wind Waker would have got about an 8 had I reviewed it, it was a little too short and pretty much lacked any kind of challenge (I completed it in Japanese and didn't die once icon_neutral.gif)
8 years ago
What you're describing is the ideal military team-action game, which is exactly what FSW is not meant to be. If I remember rightly, it says on the back of the box that it's a near-exact port of a real life military simulation game. It seems somewhat unfair to criticise a game for lacking what it's not meant to have.

As for the suggestions to add more depth.. Having four squads of two men would be terribly confusing, and rather useless at times, as there's often, as you say, only one way to do something, and usually only one way to get there. Having more teams would only benefit two or three missions.

Snipers.. Snipers would almost ruin the fun. I remember, at many points in the game, being up against an enemy way out in the distance with an RPG. Where's the fun in having one man stand up and pick him off? Also, I believe the rifleman does have some ranged ability, just not that of a Barett .50

Engineers I think would also ruin the fun. If this man has the power to take out walls, why not take out guard towers? Or, just throw the explosives through a window? It'd be a much quicker, and more boring way to solve many problems in the game. Some methods of hiding, however, are destructable, as mentioned in the training. Things like cars, boxes, sofas, etc. can be gradually torn away by heavy gunfire, or even a grenade. Using explosives would also make travelling a lot easier. Just blast your way forwards through any or all obsticles to get to where you need to go.

Personalised rosters with characteristics would, again, go against the genre, as would tank missions (as fun as they would be icon_biggrin.gif).

Night and day missions would only work if somewhere along the storyline there was an ambush, where your forces where taken by suprise at night. To my knowledge, armies don't often work at nighttime, unless they've had specific orders to do something under the cover of darkness. This being kind of backed up by the distinct difference between some dawn and dusk missions, with a seemingly purposeful omittance of night missions..


That's just my 2 gil..
8 years ago
Wind Waker short? I swear it took me 20+ hours, and I'm not that rubbish...
8 years ago
Well considering my Paper Mario 2 playtime was 40 hours, and it's taken me two years on-and-off to get to Metroid Prime in Metroid Prime.. I completed Wind Waker in three sittings..
8 years ago
GTPod wrote
What you're describing is the ideal military team-action game, which is exactly what FSW is not meant to be. If I remember rightly, it says on the back of the box that it's a near-exact port of a real life military simulation game. It seems somewhat unfair to criticize a game for lacking what it's not meant to have.
Fair point, but FSW is meant to be a game, not a military simulation. As a military simulation it does its job, but I've got to review it as a a game, and as a game it falls short in some key areas.

GTPod wrote
As for the suggestions to add more depth.. Having four squads of two men would be terribly confusing, and rather useless at times, as there's often, as you say, only one way to do something, and usually only one way to get there. Having more teams would only benefit two or three missions.
I didn't mean more squads to go in the existing levels, I meant there could have been more complex levels built around using 2-4 teams.

GTPod wrote
Snipers.. Snipers would almost ruin the fun. I remember, at many points in the game, being up against an enemy way out in the distance with an RPG. Where's the fun in having one man stand up and pick him off? Also, I believe the rifleman does have some ranged ability, just not that of a Barett .50
There's many ways to prevent Snipers from ruining things. You could give them little ammo or make them only available at certain parts of a mission. Or you could simply use snipers to suppress distant enemies, they don't have to be for killing.

GTPod wrote
Engineers I think would also ruin the fun. If this man has the power to take out walls, why not take out guard towers? Or, just throw the explosives through a window? It'd be a much quicker, and more boring way to solve many problems in the game. Some methods of hiding, however, are destructible, as mentioned in the training. Things like cars, boxes, sofas, etc. can be gradually torn away by heavy gunfire, or even a grenade. Using explosives would also make travelling a lot easier. Just blast your way forwards through any or all obstacles to get to where you need to go.
Again, engineers could have limited uses like the snipers. You could give them only a couple of explosives, you could make explosives something you find in the levels or you could have explosives air dropped at certain parts of the level. It's the destructible cover like the cars, sofas, etc that make me believe they could make explosives work in a sequel. Imagine squad Alpha clear an area only for a pair of snipers to appear in a town. Alpha are pinned down while Bravo can actually make their way underneath the snipers to the tower safely. Bravo could then destroy the tower, thus killing the snipers. Or they could blast their way in there and creep up on the snipers from behind. Once things are clear Alpha will then be able to move again. You could also have buildings with multiple blocked paths into it. Once your in there the enemy AI would react to the position you have entered accordingly.

As I said, i'd go a bit higher for the Xbox version as the whole thing feels more polished in every department, but regardless of what the game is meant to be without more depth, variety and longevity I don't feel I can score it any higher than I did. Anyway, I really appreciate your feedback, I need people's opinions to become a better reviewer so hearing what people think is always good thing whether it's positive or negative icon_smile.gif
Add Comment
Like this review?
Share it with this tiny url: http://palg.nu/7h

N4G : News for Gamers         Twitter This!

Digg!     Stumble This!

| More
  Pre-order or buy:
    PALGN recommends: www.Play-Asia.com

Australian Release Date:
  Out Now
European Release Date:
  Out Now
Publisher:
  THQ
Developer:
  Pandemic Studios
Players:
  1-2

Read more...
Currently Popular on PALGN
Australian Gaming Bargains - 08/12/11
'Tis the season to be bargaining.
R18+ Legislation
R18+ Legislation
Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm Generations Preview
Hands on time with the game. Chat time with the CEO of CyberConnect 2.
PALGN's Most Anticipated Games of 2007
24 titles to keep an eye on during 2007.
PALGN's Most Anticipated Games of 2008
And you thought 2007 was populated.