Heavy Fire: Afghanistan is a super fast playing on-rails shooter set in modern-day Afghanistan featuring tanks, assault vehicles and helicopters. The game offers 60 awards, one machine co-op for up to four, Steam Cloud, Leaderboards and Trading Cards.
User reviews: Mixed (135 reviews)
Release Date: Aug 15, 2014
Popular user-defined tags for this product:

Sign in to add this game to your wishlist or mark as not interested

Buy Heavy Fire: Afghanistan

AUTUMN SALE! Offer ends December 2

-20%
$4.99
$3.99
 

Recent updates View all (1)

September 16

Full Big Picture Support & Various Bug Fixes Are Live!

All the changes in the previous Beta are now live, plus a few additional bug fixes

Changelog Overview:
- Full Big Picture support
- New launcher: Can be controlled by mouse/keyboard or connected gamepads.
- Gamepad can be now used as a main player's controller (choose 'main controller' in the launcher). Four player mode with all players on game controllers now fully supported. Note: The Xbox 360 controller cannot be used to navigate or exit the Options Menu in gameplay
- Dodge/Jump movement with Gamepad issue fixed
- [Esc] key used to cancel user 'sign in'
- Improved save file system
- Readme files now displaying properly when using in-home streaming
- Long names no longer split into two lines on Hall of Fame

0 comments Read more

Reviews

“The game was exciting, fun, challenging, and rewarding.”
70 – Gamer's Daily

“(A) great game that is worth every penny.”
N/A – RND Games

Steam Greenlight

Full Controller Support

About This Game

FAST, DEADLY AND UNRELENTING COMBAT

Heavy Fire: Afghanistan is a super fast playing, high intensity on-rails shooter set in modern-day Afghanistan. Whether fighting up close and personal with guns and grenades, raining down fire from a helicopter or laying waste with a main battle tank, Heavy Fire: Afghanistan is an immediately fun, pickup-and-play experience for hardcore gamers and novices alike.

EXPERIENCE FAST-PACED ACTION SET IN MODERN-DAY AFGHANISTAN

You've battled through some of the most intense combat situations known to man — and it ain't over yet. Afghanistan is teeming with insurgents, and every day brings on new challenges. Today, it's up to you and your men to bring down the enemy. The intelligence reports tell you that enemy forces have been plotting their next move from a shack hidden deep within the forest on a secluded mountainside. You're going to surprise them in their own territory — and you're bringing Heavy Fire.



Stay sharp in this blisteringly fast-paced modern day shooter. Protect your team as you move from cover to cover, eliminating threats as they appear! Fight on foot or in a variety of vehicles including tanks, helicopters, and APCs. Utilize weapons ranging from handguns to mounted cannons and grenades to stay alive, keep fighting, and complete your mission.

Features

  • 24 missions featuring Exclusive Multi-Cover System
  • Experience gut-wrenching, fast-paced action set in modern-day Afghanistan
  • Fight on foot. Fight by tank, assault vehicle, and helicopter
  • More than 60 awards, ranks, and equipment upgrades
  • Co-op multiplayer play for up to 4 players on one machine
  • High quality graphics designed for 1080p
  • Steam Cloud, Leaderboards, Achievements & Trading Cards!

System Requirements

    Minimum:
    • OS: Windows XP
    • Processor: Intel® Pentium® 4 CPU 3.00GHz or similar AMD Athlon 64
    • Memory: 1500 MB RAM
    • Graphics: Direct3D 10 capable video card (NVIDIA® Geforce 8800 GT or AMD® Radeon™ HD 3870 or above) with at least 512 MB video memory. Some low-end integrated cards may not work.
    • DirectX: Version 9.0c
    • Hard Drive: 3 GB available space
    • Sound Card: DirectX 9 Compatible Audio
    Recommended:
    • OS: Windows 8
    • Processor: Core 2 Duo or similar AMD Athlon X2
    • Memory: 4000 MB RAM
    • Graphics: Direct3D 11 capable video card (NVIDIA® Geforce GTS 450 or AMD® Radeon™ HD 5670 or above) with at least 512 MB video memory. Low-end integrated and laptop cards are not recommended.
    • DirectX: Version 9.0c
    • Hard Drive: 3 GB available space
    • Sound Card: DirectX 9 Compatible Audio
Helpful customer reviews
4 of 5 people (80%) found this review helpful
1.9 hrs on record
Posted: November 5
Bad graphics, horrible audio, generic campaign. One of the worst on rail shooters I have played.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
4 of 5 people (80%) found this review helpful
0.1 hrs on record
Posted: November 3
Disaster, cant even start this dreck. Game crashes to desktop after i select play, every ♥♥♥♥ing time. No feedback from developers, exactly what i expected. Put their dreck game out, take few euros for i guess their small ♥♥♥♥ enlargement and who gives a crap about customer later on. Utter garbage!
Was this review helpful? Yes No
2 of 4 people (50%) found this review helpful
6.0 hrs on record
Posted: November 6
Why play Call of Duty when this game basically distills every COD game since Modern Warfare into its gameplay for a tenth of the price? Go here, shoot these guys, go there, shoot those guys, blow up this APC. Oh no a helicopter! Grab that rocket launcher. Etc.
As a an added bonus, you can even play it with a sandwich in the other hand, because only wimps really need to duck for cover.

Seriously though, this is a great nostalgia trip for anyone who remembers virtua cop/ time crisis light gun games at the arcade. The levels are bite sized so you can drop in for a few minutes when you feel like it. Voice acting is cheesy without being annoying and graphics fit the theme of being an arcade game. Nothing that will break your computer but also not horrible. All of the achievements are also very achievable which is always nice considering the ridiculous requirements some games have. It's not a $40, $20 or even a $10 game but for $5 or less it's worth a look if you feel like a bit of brainless shooting practise.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
1 of 3 people (33%) found this review helpful
1.7 hrs on record
Posted: November 5
Personal Rating: 6/10

A surprisingly OK arcade shooter. Don't bother trying to get into the story or listen to the dialogue because that's where the game crumbles. The graphics are very gritty and arcade-y, by that I mean it looks like it was made to be played on the GameCube and not a high end PC, but still, is it fun? Yeah. It's pretty fun to have your own arcade game with a points system on your computer. You get two guns, an M16 and a pistol. A good strategy I found is to let your M16 run out and use your pistol, because your pistol kills everything in one shot.

Is it good? Not close to good, more or less the amount of quality you'd find in an arcade shooter, like the Terminator one but with a difficulty setting and all. I do reccomend getting this game if you can get it cheap, it's a nice little time waster.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
3.5 hrs on record
Posted: November 11
Okay, first things first, this is what is called an ON-RAILS-SHOOTER. If you're unsure as to what this means, it's a bit like those "House of the Dead" arcade machines (or "Time Crisis"), where you don't really control where your character - the only movement you have is to duck into cover. If you're expecting Call of Duty or Battlefield, you'll be disappointed.

It's actually not too bad a game. The animation and graphics are pretty good (even if the effects for explosions are crap) and the makers have made a decent effort in this area. Voice acting is fair too.

The cover system in the game is pretty reasonable - not all cover provides total protection from the bad guys. You may be hidden from most of the enemies, but there may still be one or two that can hit you.

It's not an awful game. But it could be better.

As I said before, the explosions are rather disappointing - they don't look realistic at all (and no I'm not expecting huge fireballs from grenades). A little more effort here would make the game a bit more realistic.

You do tend to rely on shooting first-aid kits (for health) and ammo crates (for ammunition) but these are sometime rather difficult to see when half a dozen enemies are shooting at you. (Ctd...)

There are a few parts of the game where you reach a checkpoint with low health, and then get killed shortly afterwards. You have the option to re-start from the checkpoint, but this is with the same level of low health, which then makes it tough to progress from there onwards. In that respect there are bits of the game where you end up re-starting the entire level, and it gets frustrating.

There are also a number of quick-time events (where a key will flash up on the screen and you have to press it quickly) that initiate a particular movement (dodging falling rubble for example). However, I didn't really feel that they added that much to the game, or even that they were very important.

When balancing all this though, you have to remember - it's only £3.99 at its regular price. You could put that much into an arcade game and get about ten minutes of fun. So for less than £4 you're getting a decent full game, but bear in mind that it's not a big-budget title, and adjust your expectations accordingly.

Incidentally, some reviews and discussions mention problems with getting the game to run and/or stability (ie crashes) but I had no problems at all in this respect.

I'd give it six or seven out of ten.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
1.3 hrs on record
Posted: November 10
have played this game for 77 minutes and quite honestly cannot play anymore due to the poor mouse sensitivity issues in regard to the fact that you have no option to change the sensitivity in the options. I have played the typing of the dead and rambo the video game with the same mouse and not had this issue and regard these games as better rail shooters with a bit more thought behind them. I have read the negative reviews about people not being able to control the character and missing the point of what a rakl shooter is and the call of duty on rails reference whcih i found bizarre as the first 2 call of duty games that i have played do not have the modern warfare theme that Heavy Fire Afganistan has! Yes this game is cheaoper but really not worth it.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
28 of 31 people (90%) found this review helpful
9.9 hrs on record
Posted: August 23
I can understand the negative reviews. People are used to FPS with a free movement, more weapons and more gameplay. I can also understand that you can get bored with the repetitve scenes. And well, it's true that in the easy mode, you have often sunlight in the eyes and being blind to any enemies. True, the fact that the controller can't be set for player 1 is also annoying as the default keys for the keyboard aren't natural at all for me (AZERTY keyboard...). However, I don't understand the "outdated graphics". Seriously, you don't need CoD graphic quality to enjoy a war FPS! Graphics are good in my opinion.

And besides, the gameplay is nervous. Once you progress in the game, you can see more enemies at the screen. And when the Veteran mode is unlocked, some stuf change. Like the fact that the enemy is quicker to hurt you. I'm not used to rail shooter, I prefer "normal FPS" but it doesn't mean that I didn't enjoy it.


And for the controller thing? Developers will fix that in the next update (well normally).

Anyway, anyone is entitled to its opinion. I enjoyed this game. It's not the Game of the Year. Sure, if you're a lover of great graphics (à la CoD), you'll be disappointed. But I don't think that graphics make a game. Everything is coherent in the game, apart dates. I totally recommend it, not because I'm in love with this game, but mainly because it's still fun to beat high scores...

Was this review helpful? Yes No
17 of 21 people (81%) found this review helpful
1.0 hrs on record
Posted: August 20
I thought I would get one of those bad "vote and get a free copy" action shooters. Surprisingly, it's FUN! Won't tell you about mechanics and gameplay. This is a decent rail shooter reminding me of old SEGA game called Lethal Enforces 1&2, but with smooth graphics, upgrades and you favorite Steam achievements and cards. For a $3 game (free game in my case, as like many of you got it that way) it's really good. Cheers! The only thing I'd fix - sounds. Music is alright but all the "dum-dum" and "rha-ta-ta" sound a little bit plastic.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
11 of 12 people (92%) found this review helpful
9.0 hrs on record
Posted: August 27
Summary: Don't let the low price fool you, this game is ok; I'd give it a B-. If you ever want a break from the usual modern FPS format, this is an option that's just as entertaining, but in its own way. This game challenges the player; not always fairly, but usually so. The health meter is a welcome change from being able to recharge health by waiting under cover. Your weapons will sound a bit silly, but they get the job done. This is a game with a realistic setting, non-stop action (except for the shooting ranges) and despite its low price, it's visuals are as breathtaking as any modern game.

First, let's talk about the choice of genre: the rail shooter. It's an older style, but age in itself doesn't determine quality. We live in a time where first person shooters are legion, and most operate very similarly. If you ever want a break from that, one option is to try an older style. Would it be more exciting in an arcade cabinet? Yes, and if you tried playing this with an Xbox controller you would have a horrible experience. But as you get past the middle of the game, it gets tough, and if you want to beat the game, you couldn't do it in an arcade cabinet. A mouse and keyboard are the best way to go for this. If you spray and pray in this game, you will get hit even if you kill the enemy. But if you take advantage of the precision a mouse provides, you can get out from cover and have a fair chance of killing him without taking a hit. The difficulty may shock and tick you off if you're used to games where you can press a button to stick to cover and shoot at your enemy without exposing yourself, which is no challenge at all. In my opinion, a quality shooter of any kind is one where you have to make your own cover and get out from behind it to engage an enemy, and this game fills that requirement.

And yes, I said difficulty. Some reviewers claim that this game is as easy as Whack-A-Mole. Maybe they're the god-like, all-day snipers of Counter-Strike and Day of Defeat who cause normal mortals like me to stop playing those games out of having no chance of scoring a point. Maybe they only played the console version. Or maybe they only played the first level on normal mode, because the further I get through this game, the more that claim confuses me. The enemy can shoot back, and sometimes there will be little to no pause between the shots of one enemy and the next, making it almost impossible to break cover and shoot back without getting hit. It makes the grenades like precious gems, because they're the best way to clear enemies that won't hardly let you stick your head up. This game does challenge the player; not always fairly, but usually so. Then there are levels where you get in an Abrams tank or an Apache attack helicopter, where the enemy can't do an opium-picking thing to you, and the main challenge then is hitting everything and doing it fast, because you're always on the move.

Then there's the realism factor. Criticisms are: shoot an enemy anywhere and he dies, we're back to health meters and health packs, and the guns are just plain silly. To be fair, the rifles and pistol certainly are silly, and there's no good reason to spend an upgrade point on a new rifle, because nothing changes. Save it for extra ammo, health, grenades and faster reload time. The guns look highly detailed, but the player's small arms sound like Robotron fighting Megaman in the middle of a disco. The guns of your allies and enemies sound much better, and so do weapons mounted on vehicles. As for health meters and single shot kills, a health meter and health packs are much more realistic than many shooters where you just have to crawl under a rock and wait five seconds for all your wounds to heal, and single hit kills are more realistic than needing to put two rounds into a target's head or five into his chest. Think of the ArmA games: no mercy from bullets. I welcome the health meter back with open arms.

Now for the story. The problems that you can't escape from are the sloppy syntax and prose in this game, mainly in the journal entries before the missions. If you're thinking "This doesn't sound anything like a Marine, or any English speaker", then that's because this game was made by Teyon, a Polish video game developer. This is not the first game to have translation problems, but they could have done better on the journal entries (although the radio chatter in mid-battle sounds authentic). There are some other inaccuracies: the uniforms are Army uniforms and not Marine uniforms, and the Marines do not use the Black Hawk or the Chinook. As for the content, it doesn't deserve the hate that it gets from the politically correct about being a game in a real setting like Operation Enduring Freedom. Nobody has a problem with all the games set in the Second World War, where just about every side can be played as. Spec Ops: The Line, where your main enemies are American soldiers, has gotten a pass, so there's no ground to stand on when ridiculing this game for being from a modern American soldier's point of view. If you ask me, gamers could do with a healthy, even if unpleasant, dose of reality in their lives. Instead of trying to make some idiotic moral equivalence between the US and its foes, this game is based on authentic characters. The Marines are experts and professionals, who pull out all the stops to complete their mission with as few casualties as possible. The game punishes the player for friendly fire and civilian casualties, as it should if it wants to be taken seriously. The game doesn't name the enemy, it calls them “rebels”, but if you don't know who they really are, you must be living under a rock. They are portrayed accurately as well: they wear civilian clothes, take civilians hostage and hide behind them, and know no limits as to where they will fight from. Although the places and times of the battles aren't exact representations of real life, the concepts are real enough: combined arms battles in environments like mountains, small villages, big cities, and military bases. If you want something more varied and fantastic, then play Mass Effect or something.

Finally, I believe the game's greatest strength is in its visuals. They stand with the best of modern games. You could only get a better picture of the Afghan combat environment from a TV camera or actually visiting it. Every pocket of a uniform, every feature of a vehicle or weapon, and every contour of a building is superb. You have to deal with the very real problem of natural and artificial light in a battle, meaning it gets in your eyes. In an age where graphics are as advanced as they are, it might not seem like such a big deal that the game has excellent visuals, but how about when it has them and is selling for $5 on Steam? Now that's a cut apart, isn't it?

In the end, while it may not be my favorite game of all time, it was still a worthwhile purchase that I recommend.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
14 of 19 people (74%) found this review helpful
4.7 hrs on record
Posted: August 24
A rail shooter that pulled me out memories from the old times

Attractive graphics,enjoyable gameplay
Was this review helpful? Yes No
9 of 11 people (82%) found this review helpful
1.6 hrs on record
Posted: September 10
Alright... LISTEN MAGGOTS! Freedom ain't coming to this hellhole in the middle east if we don't deliver it with big buckets of ammo and loads of gallons of napalm... SHOOT AND BURN YOUR WAY INTO THEIR HEATHEN HEARTS and show them the true meaning of MANIFEST DESTINY!

And remember, always just shoot, these poor ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥s don't even speak AMERICAN!
Was this review helpful? Yes No
9 of 11 people (82%) found this review helpful
3.9 hrs on record
Posted: September 8
Having actually been to Afghanistan, I can testify that:

1) Terrorists do, in fact, do cartwheels 5 feet in front of you
2) One bullet kills every bad guy
3) One magazine can take down an armoured vehicle
4) The over use of the phrase "tango down"
5) One Soldier can single-handedly rid the coutnry of terrorists

So ya, if you want a real Afghanistan experience, play the hell outta this game!
Was this review helpful? Yes No
6 of 7 people (86%) found this review helpful
1.1 hrs on record
Posted: October 14
At least it's not Rambo the video game.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
33 of 59 people (56%) found this review helpful
1.0 hrs on record
Posted: August 19
"Heavy Fire: Afghanistan is a super fast playing, high intensity on-rails shooter"
Let me correct it for you.
"Heavy Fire: Afghanistan is a super boring, low intensity on-rails shooter"
This genre is totally dead on pc anyway. The devs should make this an FPS game instead of on-rails shooter, because this game is very dull and boring and bad and does not even worth your time.
The enemy can barely shoot you even if you are idle, so you will never die.
The gun sounds are barely audible. The pistol sounds like "sho sho sho".
One shot = one kill. If you shoot a terrorist on the toes, he will act like you was shooting him in the neck, and he will just die. You can even shoot them on the index finger, they will just frikkin die.
The music and the graphics are good, but the game itself is bad. I guess it will be okay on a tablet or phone, but on pc this is very weak. MAYBE if the AI was not THAT bad the game itself would not be THAT boring.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
30 of 54 people (56%) found this review helpful
2.6 hrs on record
Posted: August 17
Lightgun shooters in arcades were always great fun - if I came across a House of the Dead or Time Crisis cab somewhere, I had to play them. The genre has been pretty much dead ever since the golden age of arcades in the mid-nineties, saw a small return with the Wii just to be all but vanished again these days. So, starved for some mindless on rails shooting I got myself Heavy Fire: Afghanistan - hoping it would at least be of somewhat respectable quality.

As it turns out, this game feels like it was produced for the NES zapper and came right out of 8bit console hell. See, 1987 there was Operation Wolf and 1989 there was Mechanized Attack (the first lightgun shooter I ever played) - both games feature more excitement and fun in the first stage (which roughly lasts 1-3 minutes) than godawful Heavy Fire: Afghanistan. How so you might ask? Well, for starters Heavy Fire has a story that takes itself serious. This is not Schwarzenegger's COMMANDO turned videogame, this is the actual War on Terror turned shooting gallery - not cool in my book. They could have made this good, harmless fun like TOTAL CARNAGE back in the day did - but no, they went with the realistic approach. I am not down with an arcade game having such a serious background.

Good thing the rest is just as much of a mess, so skipping this (if you felt like checking it out in the first place) is no big deal. Seriously, I cannot imagine how to make this game any less exciting. The pacing is slow, there is a lack of some serious explosions and firepower, there is next to NO feedback or hit confirmation, animations suck - as mentioned before, arcade games from the 80ies(!) destroy this p.o.s. of a game. There is also nothing to make this game engaging in any shape or form: no multipliers, no combos, no diversity. Remember those cool combos you could do in Virtua Cop? Not here. Or shooting holes into zombies in House of the Dead? Can't do anything like that. It does have an awkward cover system, but that is about the only thing it shares with Time Crisis. Hmm, what else? Grenades are super-awkward to use, with a big wind-up before your guy actually throws the damn things instead of acting like insta-smartbombs as any person who actually has played GOOD lightgun games would imagine and OF COURSE there is a ♥♥♥♥ty perk/level-up system in place (every two completed missions you get to choose EXCITING upgrades like bigger clip-size!). Did I mention they even borked reloading? Don't think so: well, they borked reloading. Instead of it being instant you get a crappy cooldown, forcing you to keep your head in cover, even with faster reload this is not as fast as I would want this to be. Also, ammo is limited. Oh, and we got QTEs - can't have a ♥♥♥♥ty game without those, right?

This game has barely anything going for it besides the visuals, which are okayish (though somebody hit 11 on the post-processing) and we got House of the Dead: Overkill on Steam which is so incredibly superior to this that there is NO reason to waste 5 bucks like I did. So, until you want to relive the excitement of Duck Hunt on your NES with PS2 graphics and USA! USA!-content - stay the hell away from this!
Was this review helpful? Yes No
5 of 6 people (83%) found this review helpful
2.0 hrs on record
Posted: September 13
One of the worst games I've ever played.
However I do understand the freaks who likes these kind of games.. ;P

Even IF you would like these games it's still horrible acting, voices.. Everything feels like it's out of sync. And its impossible to die and the enemies dies if you shoot them with one bullet in the arm. ONE bullet.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
6 of 8 people (75%) found this review helpful
2.9 hrs on record
Posted: August 22
It's like Time Crisis, but slower and boringer.
Enemies are too dumb and easy to kill (1 shot)
Suitable for male children around 5 with low reflexes (no joke).
Was this review helpful? Yes No
6 of 8 people (75%) found this review helpful
0.2 hrs on record
Posted: August 20
This a fun, classic "rail-shooter" just like you would find in an arcade. If you like trying to "beat" games like this, they you will have a blast. If you are looking for a FPS, please understand that is not what this game is. A lot of the other reviewers seemed to be expecting something that this was not meant to be.

Graphics, sound and action are all good and will keep you busy. Doesn't require a super-powerful PC, but the game is definitely more fun on a machine that can keep up a good framerate. Environments and levels are well done. Clearly a professional product and not just a quick indie project.
Was this review helpful? Yes No
3 of 3 people (100%) found this review helpful
1.9 hrs on record
Posted: September 25
Another day, another arcade-style game.

This time it's a rail shooter, closest comparison is definitely the Namco series Time Crisis. That's a good model to crib from, as most of the games in that series are great. Unfortunately, Heavy Fire: Afghanistan misses the mark.

This is going to come off as a really unfair comparison review. I don't care for writing these, since all too often they boil down to: "Why play this? When you can play this instead?" Also, what's the alternative? The PS2 has quite a few of the Time Crisis games, but you need the console, the games, the Guncon controllers, and a suitable TV. There's also the PS3 compilation pack that includes a couple Crisis games, but you still need the system, the games, a couple of Move controllers, etc etc. HF:A is a game you probably already own via a bundle, so let's try and make the most of it.

The biggest issue I have with the game is the length. It's about 2 hours long. Content is king but when it comes to arcade games, brevity is the soul of excellence(???). The 2 hour play-time involves a lot of padding. Each of the 12 stages is more of what you'd expect from a rail shooter. Go to an area, shoot all of the enemy soldiers, move onto the next one. This repeats over and over again with hardly any variation. The bad-guys are in different locations, but little else changes. Arcade rail-shooters generally take around 15-25 minutes to complete, and yet they still do a lot more in that shorter span of time. There are different types of enemies, some are on a variety of vehicles, others attack from all sorts of angles. Boiled down to the basics, rail-shooters hinge on the shooting gallery aspect, where your accuracy and reflexes are what keep you alive. It's how you dress everything up that keeps them interesting. HF:A doesn't do this often enough, despite how long it takes to complete.

That's not to say HF:A is nothing but soldiers firing away. Every now and then there's a guy with a knife, a heavy-gunner on a pick-up, a couple BTRs, and a Hind. Unfortunately the biggest different between the latter three adversaries is the number of bullets they take to destroy. All you have to do is make sure to get behind cover when you hear the machinegun rev up. Part of the problem I suppose is that this game is very loosely based on reality. I can't go into it expecting things like cyborgs, a final boss that's actually a brain in a jar surrounded by laser cannons, a plot to destroy America with a satellite, etc. Still, there seems like there could be a lot more variety. Give some of those soldiers different guns and have them employ different tactics. Most of the time all the enemies do is run to a particular spot and start firing away, only occasionally ducking behind cover. Something as simple as having some enemies running while shooting at you would have added a lot to the game.

Another problem with HF:A is that it isn't quite sure what it wants to be. The guns you unlock come with larger clips and by the end you've got an LMG and going Rambo on the soldiers. Rail-shooters usually fall into two camps by this point. You've got titles like Virtua Cop and Time Crisis where you're given pistols that require constant reloading, and then on the opposite end of the spectrum there are games such as L.A. & N.Y. Machineguns, Space Gun, and Rambo (the somewhat recent Sega arcade release). HF:A tries to do both (sorta like Time Crisis 3 & 4) but it never really works. For most of the game you just end up feeling like you're over-equipped, so there's no strategy. It's unfortunate that making the player-character into a 1-4 man army would have stretched the narrative far too thin. A game where you walk into an enemy base and destroy everything in minutes would have been far more exciting. Soldiers are pouring in so you gotta shoot them all, then the tanks roll in, maybe shoot some jets out of the sky. Basically this game would be turned into a next-gen Operation Wolf.

So this definitely turned out to be a comparison review. It feels like all I did was mention a bunch of games you'd be better off spending your time with. You could probably play through at least four of them in the time it would take to get through Heavy Fire: Afghanistan, and they'd all be more entertaining.

SKIP
Was this review helpful? Yes No
3 of 3 people (100%) found this review helpful
3.2 hrs on record
Posted: August 23
Romanian: Merita jucat la plictiseala
English: Worth playing when you're bored
Was this review helpful? Yes No