We actually got quite excited by the fact that Gearbox were bringing back the Brothers in Arms series.
The first three in the series were thoughtful, well paced, squad-focused shooters set in World War II. Rather than being all bombast and glory (if you ignore the plotline that is) it made you realise how frail you were. Your rifle wasn’t the most important weapon and instead it was imperative that you got your squads into the right position so that you could flank the opposition and inch ever closer to the your end target.
The AI was tight too, with the enemy retreating and regrouping when they knew that they were routed even flanking you when the opportunity arose.
So when the trailer for Brothers in Arms: Furious 4 appeared on the internet (thanks Machinima). Collective jaws dropped.
After the Splinter Cell review this week, we at Arcadian Rhythms aren’t adverse to a bit of reimagininng, but this is just ridiculous. One comment that sprung to mind was ‘It is like Duke Nukem pissing on BIA‘s grave’.
Maybe this is an over reaction on our part, maybe the game will be a joyous fusion of Inglorious Basterds and Left 4 Dead (Nazis). This might turn out to be true but why, oh why did it have to be called Brothers in Arms?
In contrast, and as a resistance to screwing up a game’s vision, Croteam have funded a bunch of indie devs to make some games that tie into their Serious Sam series and create interest in Serious Sam 3. That wasn’t necessary, but now that XBLIG indie favourite Mommy’s Best Games is making Serious Sam Double D, colour us pleased as punch.
MBG’s vision of Serious Sam appears to be just as delightfully mental as its forebearers while being very different:
Everyone enjoy what is left of their Friday and drink the weekend away.