Although this game is not technically an FPS (you can’t get either a true first-person or even a third-person perspective), it gives you pretty much the same effect. The level of realism is decent, as you would expect from a game that was initially developed in conjunction with the U.S. Army to be used for training squad leaders. Not only are weapons and equipment modeled accurately, the terrain and training are also authentic to the infantry.

In single-player mode, this game puts you in command of two fire teams, like the earlier Ghost Recon. Unlike the earlier game, however, Full Spectrum Warrior has many commands for each of your two fire teams (of the correct four soldiers each, instead of three), and you can also give orders to specific individuals. Like the real Army, you don’t get to outfit your soldiers with any mix of weapons you want. With emphasis on completing the mission, avoiding casualties and recovering wounded soldiers, this game is also true to Army doctrine. Despite the linear missions, instant healing of casualties at aid stations, and the inability of soldiers to enter buildings or climb over small piles of rubble, the game has a very realistic feel.

Overall: 73 out of 100  – This game gives you that feeling of  “being there”. Well worth the money.

I have friends who still swear by the original Ghost Recon, so I bought it cheap, used. Unfortunately, my combat experience and studies of military history and weapons leave me a bit of a harsh critic on modern military games, so Ghost Recon really draws my fire. It’s not only unrealistic, but has poor graphics and an awful team selection and command interface. I would say I expect much better from Red Storm Entertainment, since they have a great reputation for realism and authenticity, but I know Ghost Recon was one of their first games, so I forgive them their inaccuracies. Without a real understanding of how these kinds of missions work, this game could potentially be fun.

In single-player mode you are the team leader for a Special Operations team fighting terrorists in former Soviet republics. Although you can pick your team, your list is short, and you can only modify their secondary weapons and ammo selection, not issue them new weapons. You can switch between team members and between groups (your team is always divided into two groups of up to three soldiers for some reason), which helps when you get shot up. Having others under your command also helps when you want a team on overwatch or defending a position while the rest of the group goes on to secure another objective. Unfortunately, the command and control you have over these soldiers is limited to basically “go here” or “stay here” and either “defend” or “attack”. Giving teams targets to overwatch, directions to face, or conditions (“if X then Y”) would improve the interface greatly. Of course, this might have been done for the newer Ghost Recon 2, which (along with better selection controls and graphics) would actually make this a decent game.

I did not try multiplayer mode, so I gave it a five.

The numbers:

• Historical Authenticity: 4 out of 10
• Graphical Realism: 4 out of 10
• Audio Realism: 6 out of 10
• User Interface: 4 out of 10
• Tactical Gameplay: 6 out of 10
• Mission Design: 6 out of 10
• Mission Replayability: 4 out of 10
• Single-Player: 5 out of 10
• Multiplayer: 5 out of 10
• AI: 4 out of 10

Overall: 48 out of 100 – Don’t waste your money on this out-of-date unrealistic shooter, but do look at other Red Storm games.

Medal of Honor: Frontline is another sequel in the acclaimed Medal of Honor series. Although it’s a good game, it doesn’t really stand out from the pack in mission design, artwork, tactical gameplay, or historical accuracy. However, it is fun, and challenging.

Single-player is where this game shines. Since the plot is basically that you are an intelligence officer working behind enemy lines, missions may include false papers, suppressed pistols, and donning enemy uniforms. Of course, they always also include plenty of gunplay! Even though the missions are more movie-World War II than historical-World War II, they are still plausible, interesting, and enjoyable.

Multiplayer games are mostly running and gunning, with little tactical gameplay. As with many games that promote fast combat over thoughtful tactics, this game can tend to attract immature players on public servers. Find a good server and stick with it, or, better yet, play on a LAN with your friends.

The numbers:

• Historical Authenticity: 6 out of 10
• Graphical Realism: 5 out of 10
• Audio Realism: 7 out of 10
• User Interface: 7 out of 10
• Tactical Gameplay: 7 out of 10
• Mission Design: 7 out of 10
• Mission Replayability: 5 out of 10
• Single-Player: 7 out of 10
• Multiplayer: 5 out of 10
• AI: 7 out of 10

Overall: 63 out of 100 – Medal of Honor: Frontline is a decent game, and can be found cheap on the used games rack, so I recommend buying it.

FarCry has extended the modern shooter in the same way that Halflife did, but with an entirely different sort of story. Be prepared for something really interesting and unexpected by the end of the game. Mechanics are decent, with more emphasis on playability than realism.  Also like Halflife, you really get the feeling that there is some actual planning and control behind the enemies you meet.

Single-player systems are excellent, although it seems to me that you have way too much knowledge of the enemy positions and their status. I like some of the special moves, like rolling on your back and crawling to shoot up through floors. Double-weapons, on the other hand, are unwieldy and ridiculous. Still, the gameplay is fun and the different drivable vehicles and lush terrain add a feeling of depth to what is essentially a straight path through the game.

I haven’t tried FarCry as a multiplayer game, so I can only give it a five in that department. I can see how the traps, special moves, and suppressed weapons would be a great asset to that type of play though. Although I still don’t understand why any of the “bad guys” have suppressed weapons when they’re the only people on the island!

The numbers:

• Historical Authenticity: 3 out of 10
• Graphical Realism: 8 out of 10
• Audio Realism: 8 out of 10
• User Interface: 8 out of 10
• Tactical Gameplay: 9 out of 10
• Mission Design: 8 out of 10
• Mission Replayability: 7 out of 10
• Single-Player: 8 out of 10
• Multiplayer: 5 out of 10
• AI: 8 out of 10

Overall: 72 out of 100 – A truly innovative game and available on the cheap now that the xBox 360 is out.

This game did for modern first-person shooters what Thief did for fantasy roleplaying games. Stealth is the key, not shooting anything that moves, and the missions reward good use of terrain, shadows, and cover. Sneaking up behind a guard and knocking him out, then sticking his unconscious body under a dark staircase is so much more satisfying than even the best long-range headshot.

Single-player missions are tense and challenging. Supposedly, it is possible to get through the game without shooting anyone, but I haven’t been able to do it. A number of special moves are available that allow excellent use of terrain and cover. Sneaking along walls, mantling up onto ledges, shimmying down pipes, and shooting while rappelling or hanging are all options.

In multiplayer, the game runs a bit differently, as one team plays the heavily-armed mercenary guards looking for intruders while the other plays the stealthy infiltrators. The spies are unarmed, since that would make them practically invulnerable. The guards’ main job is to try to find them, then to kill them before they can complete their missions. It’s a different type of multiplayer game from typical fragfests – the slower pace heightens the tension and emphasizes the occasional combats.

The numbers:

• Historical Authenticity: 3 out of 10
• Graphical Realism: 8 out of 10
• Audio Realism: 9 out of 10
• User Interface: 9 out of 10
• Tactical Gameplay: 10 out of 10
• Mission Design: 9 out of 10
• Mission Replayability: 8 out of 10
• Single-Player: 9 out of 10
• Multiplayer: 6 out of 10
• AI: 8 out of 10

Overall: 79 out of 100 – A fantastic game, well worth the few dollars it now costs in the used game bin.

In a small market, appealing to an even tinier niche might not be the best idea, but WXP seems to have taken this niche over completely with Greg Hastings Tournament Paintball. If you have ever played tournament paintball (and I have, lots of times) you will instantly recognize the speedball fields provided as typical of the genre. There is a mix of inflated fields, pipes, and small woodsy fields with multiple bunkers. Aside from target practice or some open-field woodsball games, this game pretty much covers most of the play styles available to tournament paintball players. A variety of equipment is included, which you can purchase through your winnings. Rich kids won’t get any equipment advantage here!

The moves are typical FPS – duck, peek, prone, reload, etc. The only thing missing is the blood (yellow paintballs are used throughout). The use of a goggle-shaped screen is nice too. I was a bit put off by the option to cheat, and the lack of bounces, but despite them the game was still good. Although the available equipment is dated, it was pretty current when the game was released. The repetitive nature of the small tournament fields gets old fast, but that’s unfortunately realistic. After all, how many unusual football fields or baseball diamonds do you see in video games?

The numbers:

• Historical Authenticity: 9 out of 10
• Graphical Realism: 8 out of 10
• Audio Realism: 8 out of 10
• User Interface: 7 out of 10
• Tactical Gameplay: 8 out of 10
• Mission Design: 4 out of 10
• Mission Replayability: 3 out of 10
• Single-Player: 5 out of 10
• Multiplayer: 5 out of 10
• AI: 5 out of 10

Overall: 62 out of 100 – Not your usual “paint’em up” shooter, this game does have enough variety to challenge and distract those jaded by traditional FPS games.

The original Halflife broke new ground in the realm of first-person shooters. A real plot, NPCs with some life to them, coherent and challenging missions, and impressive art and sound all showed us what could be done with a first-person engine. Halflife 2, unbelievably, was even better than the first game. The Source engine’s introduction of incredibly-detailed physics and objects, even more spectacular graphics, and more lifelike NPCs really made this game a worthy successor to the Halflife lineage.

The single-player game is not only complex and difficult, it’s really fun! Speeding around on boats and jumping ramps, sneaking around quiet buildings waiting to jump (or be jumped by!) anything, and racing through heart-pounding narrow escapes highlight some of the action you will experience. As new concepts and equipment are introduced, they are explained through the game, but the interface is so good that it’s hardly necessary. Combined with a great story, this game is hard to beat.

I have to admit, I have never played this game in multiplayer. I have only played multiplayer games based on the Source engine (e.g., Counterstrike: Source). Unfortunately, I had to give the game a 5 in this area, since I haven’t tried it myself.

The numbers:

• Historical Authenticity: 5 out of 10
• Graphical Realism: 8 out of 10
• Audio Realism: 8 out of 10
• User Interface: 9 out of 10
• Tactical Gameplay: 8 out of 10
• Mission Design: 10 out of 10
• Mission Replayability: 8 out of 10
• Single-Player: 10 out of 10
• Multiplayer: 5 out of 10
• AI: 8 out of 10

Overall: 79 out of 100 – This is one amazing game! So get it already!

If you haven’t played this game, you must have been living in a cave for the past five years! Halo pushed the limits for a science fiction FPS when it came out (as have its sequels, aptly named Halo 2 and Halo 3). It’s still fun, with fast gameplay, amazing graphics, and exciting aliens, vehicles, and weapons.

The single-player game is extremely well-written, with great graphic  design, artistic sky and landscapes, and an excellent musical score. A thoroughly professional job that is not only playable, but also replayable. Although the “levels” are pretty similar in their goals (kill aliens, rescue survivors, kill aliens, follow the Librarian, kill aliens…), details like terrain, equipment, enemies, and time prevent them from becoming stale. The only drawback I encountered was a horrible framerate on my machine, which, although it is pretty out-of-date now, was pretty hot when Halo was introduced.

In Multiplayer, Halo is fast and lethal, but lacks the originality of the solo gameplay. Deathmatches are pretty much the standard, with a few other types of competitions (King of the Hill, for example) available. There are no “realistic” missions, like blowing up bridges, escorting convoys, or capturing objectives.  Since I have been unable to find any public servers online, you’re pretty much stuck with this as a LAN game, where at least lag won’t be an excuse!

The numbers:

• Historical Authenticity: 5 out of 10
• Graphical Realism: 6 out of 10
• Audio Realism: 6 out of 10
• User Interface: 8 out of 10
• Tactical Gameplay: 9 out of 10
• Mission Design: 9 out of 10
• Mission Replayability: 9 out of 10
• Single-Player: 9 out of 10
• Multiplayer: 7 out of 10
• AI: 8 out of 10

Overall: 76 out of 100 – This is a classic game that is both fun and challenging, and, since it’s pretty cheap now that Halo 3 is out, get it!

I loved this game when it first came out, and hasn’t left my hard drive since! Based on the latest generation of Castle Wolfenstein, Enemy Territory is a free online-only multiplayer game of World War II combat. The thing that separates it from the other World War II shooters that came out around the same time (aside from its price) is the use of ongoing experience gained by your character as you play. This experience stays on the server as long as you play, so if you play for many hours on the same server, you could conceivably max out all of the skills and special abilities in each class.

The scenarios are well-designed and involve more than just obtaining checkpoints and clearing bunkers. Progress must be made continually to push past enemy positions, perform specific actions, or defend against a heavy assault. The graphics are a bit campy, and gameplay even more so, with medics leaving a breadcrumb-like trail of first aid kits and flags marking spawn points, but the game is just so much darn fun, it’s hard to point out the historical flaws! If only there were more than seven maps, I would probably still be playing it right this minute!

The numbers:

• Historical Authenticity: 3 out of 10
• Graphical Realism: 4 out of 10
• Audio Realism: 6 out of 10
• User Interface: 7 out of 10
• Tactical Gameplay: 8 out of 10
• Mission Design: 10 out of 10
• Mission Replayability: 10 out of 10
• Single-Player: 5 out of 10
• Multiplayer: 10 out of 10
• AI: 5 out of 10

Overall: 68 out of 100 – Not only is this game fun, it’s completely free!  Get it!

Day of Defeat is an online-only mod of Halflife for World War II combat. One of the most successful multiplayer mods (along with Counterstrike and Team Fortress), Day of Defeat has a number of additional mods available for it (not all of which are worth the few minutes it takes to download and install them). I particularly recommend the “realism” mods and additional weapon packs.

This game attracts fewer immature players that Counterstrike, and the weapons, animations, and terrain are better quality. Gameplay is fast and furious, and it is capable of putting a moderate strain on your video card and processor while still playing at a decent frame rate. I suggest playing on several servers until you find one with low latency, good mods, and a friendly bunch of players.

The numbers:

• Historical Authenticity: 3 out of 10
• Graphical Realism: 6 out of 10
• Audio Realism: 6 out of 10
• User Interface: 6 out of 10
• Tactical Gameplay: 7 out of 10
• Mission Design: 7 out of 10
• Mission Replayability: 8 out of 10
• Single-Player: 5 out of 10
• Multiplayer: 7 out of 10
• AI: 5 out of 10

Overall: 60 out of 100 – Just another World War II multiplayer game, but with Halflife’s engine; it’s stable, fast, and there are a lot of servers online.