GameSpot Reviews

Player Reviews

Average Player Score Based on 976 ratings
4.5
Please Sign In to rate The History Channel: Battle for the Pacific
Score Breakdown Based on 976 ratings
  1. 10 (142)
  2. 9 (27)
  3. 8 (48)
  4. 7 (72)
  5. 6 (83)
  6. 5 (102)
  7. 4 (99)
  8. 3 (87)
  9. 2 (94)
  10. 1 (222)

Most Helpful Positive Player Reviews

Most Helpful Critical Player Reviews

What Gamespot Users have to say about The History Channel: Battle for the Pacific

  • User Rating 1.5

    Honest Game Review.

    Rated on August 28, 2009 by stufferz

    When i bought this game, i was expecting some good fun and historically accurate WW2 shooter, but see what I got.... The Ai is tedious and horrible, you could basically just walk through the games...

    2 out of 4 found this review helpful.
  • User Rating 1

    just d yourself a HUGE favor...NEVER EVER buy a game with the words: "history channel" in its titel.

    Rated on May 10, 2008 by ps2-4-life

    dont buy games of the history channel...worst games!!! I played this game..terrible!!! but u know what is even worst?? "the history channel: great battles of rome"...the game is as abysmal as abysmal...

    0 out of 1 found this review helpful.
  • User Rating 2

    With terrible gameplay, graphics, voice acting, and story this game is truely horrible. History channel, stick to shows.

    Rated on November 18, 2009 by ShootumUP26

    Some games have been bad, but never like this. The graphics make me feel like im playing the N64 again. The voice acting is so bad i had to make my own. The story has cool videos but the cut-scenes an...

    1 out of 2 found this review helpful.
  • User Rating 3.5

    A very boring and repetitive game.

    Rated on June 16, 2008 by ThePaTstER

    Battle for the Pacific is a game created by the History Channel. I thought this game would rather be good, but i got a shocking surprise. This game is rather repetitive and boring. All the levels are ...

    0 out of 0 found this review helpful.
  • User Rating 2.5

    This game effectively passes on the pain of war. Consider yourself a casualty.

    Rated on June 27, 2008 by ferdi1224

    The WWII shooter genre has become a bit worn out. There are some excellent WWII games, like Brothers in Arms, Call of Duty, and Medal of Honor, but there are far too many bad games out there too. Mo...

    0 out of 1 found this review helpful.
  • User Rating 5

    Even worse than I expected.

    Rated on November 24, 2007 by Hardcore_81

    Pros... - High framerate - A new game for fans of this genre :p Cons... - Short - Unchallenging/stupid enemy AI - Uninteresting objectives - Numerous "invisible walls" I'm giving...

    4 out of 5 found this review helpful.
  • User Rating 10

    This is a great game! I dont understand y people dont have a taste for a good ww2 fps game anymore cm on people.

    Rated on November 24, 2007 by GunnyNoland

    Love this game it will be the most popular game within 2007. why dont people like ww2 fps games anymore its just weird cm on. Just plain fun very good game i love it and if you just tried and played l...

    10 out of 33 found this review helpful.
  • User Rating 5.5

    Good History and Environments, Poor action!

    Rated on December 08, 2007 by ShogaNinja

    The problem with this game is that the action is terrible. Every other aspect of the game was done very decently and I especially like the environments and the missions feel more realistic than your C...

    1 out of 2 found this review helpful.
  • User Rating 1

    Good. God. Almighty.

    Rated on January 18, 2008 by veggie530

    There is nothing good to say about this game. I swear that you can't even tell the AI are Japanese the graphics are so horrific. Do yourself a favor and avoid even looking at the cover of this game. ...

    2 out of 3 found this review helpful.
  • User Rating 1

    Awful, uninspired, boring and ugly.

    Rated on February 05, 2008 by Zach68486

    Awful. This is the only word I can think of to accurately describe this horrible game. The sad thing is, the HISTORY CHANNEL was behind it...they could have made a nice and worthwhile historic/realist...

    0 out of 1 found this review helpful.