Tribute to Brothers In Arms

   Shooter games are everywhere. You've got your run-and-gun Halo clones, your cover-based Gears of War clones, and your endless reskins of Call of Duty. But every once in a while it's nice to see something different that comes along. Enter Brothers in Arms (2005-8), a series of Second World War first-person tactical shooters. Although the series is still alive today with continued releases for mobile devices, there were only three proper games released for consoles, where the game truly shined. They were Road to Hill 30 (2005), Earned in Blood (2005), and Hell's Highway (2008). Each of them ranks among my personal list of favourite shooters. It's just a shame that the fourth console game in the series was never developed; at this point it seems doubtful that it ever will be. You may be thinking, “But Tony, what made them so good? Why are they worth missing?” I'll tell you. This is my tribute to the Brothers in Arms series.

Road to Hill 30 (2005)

   There was a time when WWII shooters were the big thing, and yet there weren't too many WWII tactical shooters out there. This is what made BiA stand out to me. For those of you wondering, a tactical shooter is a squad-based shooter game that attempts to simulate realistic combat by placing an emphasis on patience, coordination, tactics, and cover. This ain't no run-and-gun; you can't just madly dash around alone across a map straight towards your enemies. You'll get pwned and your opponents will walk away without a scratch! This is a thinking man's shooter, son. It's not for babies! It's a different kind of shooter game altogether, and I have to admit it took me a while to really get it. But once you've figured out how the game works, it is extremely satisfying to see your plans executed so well. Basically, you command your AI teammates (or do it yourself) to pin down an enemy with covering fire while you (or the AIs) flank and kill the enemy from his exposed side(s). Your teammates' AI was smart enough to get the job done, and – thanks to the situational awareness mode – you are too, without having to rely (too much) on trial-and-error to progress. A steadily increasing challenge is given as you gradually face stronger enemy types. Later on you'll even get to attack artillery positions and go toe-to-toe against tanks. Now those fights are sure to get your heart racing.

   I guess I should talk about the story. You play as Sergeant Matt Baker, a US paratrooper with the 502^nd Regiment, who becomes a reluctant squad leader. Matt takes it upon himself to keep as many of his men alive while still being able to do his job. He doesn't talk much during the gameplay (aside from barking orders at his comrades), but his character is revealed in the overly-dramatic pre-level voiceovers. But the developers did a great job at giving each and every character his own personality. You'd need play the game several times over in order to catch all of it. They also did an amazing job of recreating the campaign's settings. That's right, the combat depicted in this game is based on actual firefights that happened in real locations that can be viewed in the unlockables menu. The bridges, buildings, and roads that you'll fight for are the exact same ones that the 502^nd Regiment fought for decades earlier. Now that's cool.

   Nevertheless, I'd hesitate to call RtH30 a masterpiece. The enemy AI isn't all that reactive to your manoeuvres, the graphics are average, and there's this weird glitch in which if someone is killed while firing an automatic weapon, the automatic fire sound effect is sustained until you either die and/or reload the last checkpoint. It's pretty irritating, that glitch. Otherwise, the first game in the Brothers in Arms series is a load of fun and a decent challenge.

Earned in Blood (2005)

   This is where crap gets real. In a lot of respects, Earned in Blood is a very similar game to its predecessor, having been released only seven months after RtH30. Both games have the same graphics, the same physics engine, the same sound effects (which are excellent, by the way), the same command system/tactics, and same real life settings. However, seasoned players will appreciate the subtle differences in this gem.

   Let's start with the story. In this game, players take control of Sergeant Joe “Red” Hartsock, a member of Baker's dozen from the first game who eventually gets promoted and leads his own squad. Told in flashbacks, Hartsock's story is one of learning to grow up and accept responsibility. The drama is a bit less cheesy, and it's rendered a bit better thanks to the more dynamic facial animations. Anyways, Earned in Blood's first few levels take place concurrently with those of Road to Hill 30, while the rest take place afterwards. It actually builds upon the universe that was established in the first game.

   The level design has been noticeably improved in the second game. The levels are a bit more open-ended. Don't get me wrong; they're still pretty linear, it's just that the levels here usually contain multiple alternatives to plan your attacks (whereas in RtH30, there's usually just one or two fairly obvious ways that you're supposed to make your approach with). What I'm saying is, you have more options. No two playthroughs will be exactly the same. Also, there are more levels that take place in cities. So if you like the challenge of urban combat – of rooting out the defenders from every nook and cranny – then this game is for you. In EiB, you've got to survey your surroundings better than you did in RtH30. I guess you could say it's the more immersive game of the two.

   But the biggest gameplay difference with Earned in Blood is its difficulty. The first game was hard enough – you have a health bar, but there's no health power-ups available, it only takes a handful of shots to finish you, and mortars can wipe out your whole squad in the blink of an eye – but EiB takes the difficulty to a whole new level. In addition to the aforementioned urban combat, this game also updated the enemy AI. The Germans are way smarter this time around, as they too have now learned how to fire and manoeuvre. In a form of “active defence”, your enemy will withdraw to a new position if he knows that he's being flanked. There's even a few moments when the enemy will charge you if he knows you're outnumbered! As was the case with the previous game, your gunfire is slightly inaccurate and the German tanks are always more powerful than the Americans', both of which is true-to-life to WWII soldiering. As a result, no matter how difficult and frustrating a level can be, it is still a fair fight. You got that? Winning is hard, but oh so satisfying. Besides, it carries over the mercy rule from RtH30 – after dying three or so times on the same checkpoint the player is given the option to have his health restored and his dead comrades revived.

   The challenge in this game feels more complete and engrossing. It's this – combined with the better story-telling and immersion – that leads me to conclude that Earned in Blood is the best Brothers in Arms game yet made.

Hell's Highway (2008)

   With the release of Hell's Highway, the BiA series took a hard turn. Instead of waiting only a few months, Gearbox took their time with the series' third instalment. Released three years and one console generation after EiB, HH tried doing a lot of things differently. I've got a lot to say about this one, so let's get to it.

   HH takes place in September 1944 during the ill-fated Operation Market Garden. The player once again controls Sgt. Matt Baker, who continues to try to balance his responsibilities with his relationships with the men under his command. It's not easy – especially as the operation isn't proceeding as smoothly as hoped – and Baker's capacity for leadership is stressed to the breaking point. That's the basic gist of it. Even more than the earlier games, each character has something going on and there's dozens of subplots. Within longer cutscenes that are no longer confined to a 1^st person point of view, the drama is piled high and carries a lot of emotional weight to it. Needless to say, Hell's Highway has an outstanding story. On this alone I would recommend playing it. It could almost be a Band of Brothers episode! (It already features the voice of Dale Dye as Colonel Sink.) It's just a shame that the graphics suck so much; they're outdated by at least 2 years. Also, the locations are no longer based on real ones.

   Probably the biggest change HH brings to the BiA series is its cover mechanic. Press a button when you're near a large enough object and Matt will snap to it as the camera switches to a 3^rd person viewpoint. The system works OK, but it is kind of silly that the developers couldn't be bothered to put in lip movements whenever Matt shouts an order from cover.

   There's also a lot of other differences that this games makes, for better or worse. For one thing, you can now run, which is awesome. This comes at the expense of being able to jump, which was never all that useful in the first place. Same with the “charge/assault” command; it's also gone, but you rarely had to use it in the previous games anyways. Your situational awareness has been replaced with a simple map that you'll seldom use. Baker's pistol is now always on you. This addition is a bit of a mixed bag; it was pretty much necessary since the gun is now (suddenly) a part of the series' mythos. However, since it's not all that effective you'll hardly ever use it. Plus whenever you're in a tight jam, it's another weapon slot you have to cycle through in order to select the weapon you want. But one of the cooler additions to HH is that there's more of a variety in the weapons teams you command. The classic assault team and fire team is now supplemented with a machine gun team and a bazooka team.

   HH's level design is pretty good. It's almost as good as EiB's except for a few glaring differences. One is that there are some sections (even a whole level) where Baker is separated from his squad and has to fight alone – and most of the time it isn't explained why. These sections are disappointing because squad-based teamwork is what the whole Brothers in Arms series is about. It's as if Gearbox is trying to pander to the Call of Duty crowd with this crap. (They're barking up the wrong tree.) Another big disappointment is the not one, not two, but three levels where you take control of a tank and f*** s*** up (again, all by yourself). These levels are fun at first, but in my opinion it was always more fun to be an infantryman commanding the tank and defending it from enemies with panzerfausts. Commanding – not driving – tanks would have given Hell's Highway a more tactical and challenging feel to it.

   But the the most disappointing aspect of Hell's Highway is its difficulty: it's way too easy! How come? Well first off, the health bar is now gone and replaced with one of those silly regenerating health things that pretty much all shooters have nowadays. If you get shot too much, just hide behind a wall for a few seconds and soon you'll be a-OK. Kind of takes away from the realism, doesn't it? What's more, your comrades don't really die in this game. If they take too much damage, they fall down and just sort of writhe around silently until you kill all the enemies in the area, at which point your teammates will get back up as if nothing happened. So yeah, there's pretty much no tension left with the action sequences in HH. The enemies aren't much better, rarely moving to new positions, usually staying put in just one spot, and almost never throwing grenades of their own. Enemy tanks are a complete joke. Sneaking up on them is easier than ever. Just by running straight towards it and pressing a button, you can plant a C4 charge on it. This kills any tank in just one go, making it a more effective solution than using your bazooka squad (which the game expects you to do). If the goal of the series was to make WWII shooters that were realistic, then fearlessly running around alone in the open blowing up tanks like Superman should not be a part of the program, you know what I mean?

Despite this, I still think Hell's Highway is a good game. I just don't think it measures up to the other games of the series.

   And it is a good series. The Brothers in Arms console games are all fine, accessible examples of tactical first-person shooters and a great source of fond memories for me. Each of them are a must have for shooter fans looking for something different. If you're interested then go check them out; they're really easy to find and they're usually fairly cheap. It's a shame that the fourth game – that was hinted at with the “to be continued” at the end of HH – probably won't see the light of day. But I'm certainly thankful for the three underrated gems that we did get.