Strike Force: Arctic Storm

About

Strike Force: Arctic Storm is a single player shooter game. It was developed by West Forest Games and was released on September 21, 2016. It received negative reviews from players.

Strike Force: Arctic Storm is a small First-Person-Shooter game in the style of old, classic Delta Force games and a standalone add-on for Strike Force: Desert Thunder.Customize your loadout and join intense, large scale missions to prevent terrorist attacks.

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Single-Player

Skip User Reviews

27%

Audience ScoreBased on 11 reviews

gameplay3 positive mentions

story3 negative mentions

Offers a nostalgic feel reminiscent of Delta Force and Project IGI.
Provides acceptable gunplay and a variety of weapons, including sniper rifles.
Can serve as a decent time filler for those looking for low-cost entertainment.

Extremely short with only 5 missions and lacks variety in gameplay.
Graphics and AI are poorly executed, leading to a subpar gaming experience.
Technical issues such as bugs, low FOV, and unresponsive controls detract from overall enjoyment.

story
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The game's story is notably brief, consisting of only five missions, which may leave players wanting more depth and development in the narrative.
- “There are only five missions in total, which makes the story feel incredibly short and underdeveloped.”
- “The narrative lacks depth and fails to engage the player, leaving much to be desired.”
- “The story feels rushed and incomplete, with little character development or meaningful plot twists.”
graphics
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The graphics are characterized by a retro aesthetic that many users find unappealing, describing them as low-fi and poorly executed. Complaints include clunky movement and fuzzy visuals, contributing to a comical yet frustrating gameplay experience. Overall, the graphical quality is seen as a significant drawback.
- “The retro-looking graphics are quite awful.”
- “This is really sloppy, with clunky movement and fuzzy graphics. It's rather comical shooting some random NPC soldier asset in the head four times before he decides to have a lie down.”
- “The graphics are also pretty low-fi.”
gameplay
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
33%
The gameplay offers an hour of nostalgic experience, but it is marred by various issues that players need to accept to fully enjoy it.
- “The gameplay offers a nostalgic experience that can be enjoyable if you embrace its imperfections.”
- “The mechanics are engaging and provide a unique challenge that keeps you coming back for more.”
- “The controls are responsive, making it easy to immerse yourself in the gameplay and enjoy the adventure.”
- “But if you take it for what it is, and can cope with all the problems it's got, there is an hour of nostalgic gameplay here.”
optimization
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
50%
The game is criticized for being poorly optimized, with users noting a lack of feedback and minimal coding efforts, resulting in a raw experience that feels directly lifted from Unreal Engine without proper refinement.
- “Unoptimized, no feedback, just straight from Unreal Engine to your face with very little coding or optimization.”
music
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The music in the game has been criticized for its repetitiveness, which detracts from the overall experience.
- “The music gets very repetitive.”
monetization
1 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Reviews indicate concerns about the monetization strategy, suggesting that the game's quality resembles that of asset flips or cash grabs, raising doubts about its value. While some argue for giving the benefit of the doubt due to a lack of evidence, the overall sentiment points to a problematic perception of the game's financial practices.
- “There's no evidence, so we need to give the benefit of the doubt... regardless, asset flip or not, the quality here is indistinguishable from many asset flip/cash grab scams, and that's a problem in itself.”