Heavy Fire: Afghanistan

About

"Heavy Fire: Afghanistan" is a fast-paced, on-rails shooter set in modern-day Afghanistan, offering intense combat situations and a variety of weapons to use. Players must fight up close with guns and grenades, rain down fire from a helicopter, or lay waste with a main battle tank to defeat enemy forces. The game features a pickup-and-play experience that is immediately fun for both hardcore gamers and novices.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Local Multi-Player Play with friends in the same physical space using split-screen or multiple screens
2-Players Play with one other player, either online or locally, in a cooperative or competitive game mode
Multi-Player Compete or cooperate with other players online
Single-Player Play through the game's story or campaign solo
Split Screen Play with multiple players on the same screen, often with divided or shared screen real estate

62%

Audience ScoreBased on 198 reviews

gameplay18 positive mentions

music3 negative mentions

Heavy Fire: Afghanistan offers fast-paced combat and dynamic environments, making it an engaging on-rails shooter experience.
The game features straightforward and responsive controls, allowing players to easily jump into the action.
Cooperative multiplayer mode adds fun and variety, enhancing the overall gameplay experience.

The game suffers from repetitive gameplay and lacks depth, leading to a boring experience over time.
Audio quality is subpar, with unsatisfying gun sounds and poor voice acting that detracts from immersion.
There are significant issues with enemy visibility and AI behavior, making gameplay frustrating at times.

story
106 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
11%
77%
11%
The story in "Heavy Fire: Afghanistan" is largely criticized for being generic and forgettable, with many players noting that it lacks depth and engagement. While the game features a series of missions centered around an American soldier's combat experience in Afghanistan, the narrative is often overshadowed by repetitive gameplay and clunky dialogue. Overall, the attempts at storytelling are seen as weak, leading to a lack of memorable moments that fail to elevate the gameplay experience.
- “Has decent graphics, runs smooth with no bugs and a good storyline.”
- “A decent rail shooter with a reasonable storyline and good gameplay, although a bit on the easy side once you have the hang of the cover system and how to use it.”
- “There is a reasonable variety in the missions, in the open, villages, tunnels/caves, on a helicopter, in a tank, etc. so it doesn't become too repetitive.”
- “The story about some US soldier, believing he can do anything that really matters by shooting Afghans on their land... weak.”
- “Heavy Fire: Afghanistan is an average game; you play it for a couple of hours and then not remember a single part of the story.”
- “Maybe it would have been better if there hadn't been an attempt at a story.”
gameplay
74 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
24%
59%
16%
The gameplay of "Heavy Fire: Afghanistan" is characterized as a classic on-rails shooter that offers intense action and immersive experiences, though it suffers from repetitiveness and basic mechanics. While some players appreciate the cover system and quick-time events that add variety, others criticize the controls as dull and the overall design as flawed, leading to a lack of engagement. Overall, it is seen as a decent but forgettable entry in the genre, appealing primarily to fans of linear arcade shooters.
- “Heavy Fire: Afghanistan is a thrilling on-rails arcade shooter that delivers intense action and immersive gameplay.”
- “This was a very well-paced shooter-on-rails with detailed environments, solid but basic gameplay that reminded me of the classic old school light-gun games of the arcades.”
- “The gameplay is good for a rail shooter and it’s neat that friendly characters pop up so it doesn’t look like you’re Rambo’ing through it all.”
- “Seriously, 12 missions of the same rinse and repeat with no story and broken gameplay.”
- “The gameplay was atrocious, and made the game a slog to go through.”
- “Shooting mechanics and controls are dull and irresponsive.”
graphics
60 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
37%
57%
7%
The graphics of the game are generally described as decent but not groundbreaking, effectively capturing a gritty warzone atmosphere. While some players find them acceptable for a game from 2010/11, others note that they feel subpar compared to contemporary titles, with occasional graphical bugs and issues like poor visibility in certain conditions. Overall, the visuals are considered satisfactory for the price, especially for those nostalgic for older arcade-style shooters.
- “The graphics, while not groundbreaking, effectively capture the gritty atmosphere of a warzone.”
- “Together with the excellent graphics, atmospheric sound and easy to use controls you get a great feeling of immersion.”
- “The animation and graphics are pretty good (even if the effects for explosions are not great) and the makers have made a decent effort in this area.”
- “Unfortunately, the graphics were substandard by 2011, and perhaps the game was more bearable with motion controls and the gun add-on to mimic a light gun.”
- “The visuals are somehow sub-par even in comparison with some PS2-era games.”
- “Lot of graphical bugs.”
music
10 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
20%
50%
30%
The music in the game features a catchy soundtrack that effectively motivates players, while the overall audio quality is described as basic. Many users find the game music enjoyable and relaxing, contributing positively to the gaming experience.
- “Game music is very good too.”
- “Soundtrack & audio: basic.”
- “A single catchy soundtrack that eggs you forward.”
- “I relaxed for 5 minutes listening to this music, long enough to realize that I would be okay.”
replayability
8 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
38%
25%
38%
The game's replayability is mixed, with some users rating it as low as 2/10 due to the limited number of missions (only 12) and minimal differences between difficulty levels. However, others find value in replaying the campaign to improve scores and tackle various waves, resulting in a higher rating of 7.5/10 for those who enjoy the genre. Overall, replayability largely depends on individual preferences for score-chasing and wave challenges.
- “Although there are only twelve levels, the replayability comes from how many waves you want to shoot through.”
- “Fans of the genre who don't mind replaying the same campaign can do so to better their score.”
- “Replay value: 7.5/10”
- “Replayability (2/10) - 12 veteran missions (even though I didn't really feel a difference between this and hard difficulty).”
- “Longevity/replayability: fans of the genre who don't mind replaying the same campaign can do so to better their score.”
- “Although only twelve levels, the replayability is how many waves you want to shoot through.”
atmosphere
6 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
50%
17%
The game's atmosphere is characterized by effective graphics that convey a gritty warzone feel, complemented by atmospheric sound and user-friendly controls that enhance immersion. However, some users feel that despite the varied scenes, the overall atmosphere is lacking.
- “The graphics, while not groundbreaking, effectively capture the gritty atmosphere of a warzone.”
- “Together with the excellent graphics, atmospheric sound, and easy-to-use controls, you get a great feeling of immersion.”
- “Though there are various scenes, there is no such thing as an atmosphere.”
optimization
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game, originally released in 2011 for the Wii and PS3, is criticized for being a poorly optimized port of the console version, resulting in bugs and stuttering frames. However, players have noted that these issues are relatively easy to fix.
- “It is worth noting that this first came out in 2011, mainly for the Wii and PS3, and as another reviewer pointed out, this is a bit of a badly optimized port of the console version.”
- “Bugs and stuttering frames were an easy fix though.”
emotional
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Users express a sense of emotional emptiness when engaging with the series, contrasting it unfavorably with other rail shooters like Time Crisis, which they find more fulfilling and worth revisiting. This sentiment suggests that the emotional impact of the game falls short compared to its peers.
- “I almost decided to keep it to have another rail shooter in my collection, but I'd revisit Time Crisis over a dozen times and not feel empty like this series made me feel.”
grinding
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players consistently find the grinding aspect of the game to be boring, repetitive, and tedious, leading to a generally negative perception of this gameplay element.
- “It's boring, it's repetitive, and it's tedious.”
- “It's boring, it's repetitive, and it's tedious.”