User Reviews

Basic but addictive. RussS (819) 3.25 Stars3.25 Stars3.25 Stars3.25 Stars3.25 Stars

Our Users Say

Category Description User Score
Gameplay How well the game mechanics work (player controls, game action, interface, etc.) 3.6
Graphics The quality of the art, or the quality/speed of the drawing routines 3.3
Personal Slant How much you personally like the game, regardless of other attributes 3.4
Sound / Music The quality of the sound effects and/or music composition 3.0
Overall User Score (24 votes) 3.4

Critic Reviews

MobyRanks are listed below. You can read here for more information about MobyRank.
HonestGamers (Apr 26, 2008)
The shooter genre has come a long way since 1988. We've battled aliens, marveled at screen-filling explosions and walls of bullets that undulate hypnotically. There's none of that here, but it doesn't matter. 1943: The Battle of Midway stands proud as one of the finest of its kind and it always will. Thank you, Uncle Jasper--for everything--and thank you, Capcom, for this game!
Retro Game Age (Sep 01, 2014)
This is the game 1942 should have been and in my opinion is superior to the arcade game outside of the graphics. A few years makes all the difference as 1943 is one of the top shooters on the NES despite its age.
Retro4Ever (Nov 20, 2012)
This game would be a great candidate for the Virtual Console, but Capcom is yet to release it. If you want to play this exciting, polished shooter from the early NES days, you’ll need to track down an original cartridge. It will probably cost you around $10, and it’s well worth it at that price. I shouldn’t have to tell you that if you have the choice between 1942 and 1943 to go with the sequel. They might sound similar, but 1943 is light-years beyond what you get with the first game.
Video Game Den (Dec 14, 2011)
But, all in all, 1943 is an excellent port that you shouldn't miss if you're a fan of the 194x series.
1943: The Battle of Midway is an excellent game - everything that 1942 should have been and more! If you can find this one and you love shooters, ABSOLUTELY give it a shot!
75 (Jan, 2011)
This is war. 1942 was a schoolyard scrap compared to this apocalyptic year-after.
The Video Game Critic (Oct 24, 2000)
Unlike 1942, taking a hit won't instantly destroy you - it just drains your energy. Upon meeting your demise, a password is provided, along with an option to continue. Unlike the incessant beeping of 1942, 1943 even features some nice upbeat music. A satisfying shooter with surprising depth, the game's only real disappointment is the lack of a two-player mode.
Retro Game Reviews (Mar 10, 2015)
1943: The Battle of Midway is well thought-out with tons more strategy and depth than most other NES shooters. It's by no means a bad game but I just wish Capcom would have included a difficulty setting and added some more variety to break up the monotonous action.
Sharkberg (Dec 03, 2015)
Somewhat bland graphics and lack of co-op aside, 1943 is a fantastic shmup that incorporates a lot of new elements fused with solid core gameplay, and everything runs so smoothly it’s amazing to watch. Seriously, I couldn’t believe my NES was running a shmup without slowdown. It’s just…unheard of. If you can handle the challenge, 1943 is certainly worth your time.
While still a fun title, this would have benefited from a more traditional approach to lives, time, and weapons.
In conclusion, I can say that 1943: The Battle of Midway is definitely a title for the NES that you should have at least played if you're a fan of the system, and maybe even of shooters. It's leagues beyond 1942, but yet it doesn't really pull off what they were trying and needed a bit of work to get it perfect in my opinion. Arcade ports aren't the easiest thing to do and can sometimes turn out hideous, which this isn't, but it isn't the best game either. I'm not even sure why I still own it, even from a collecting standpoint. If you're going to play it, keep the above in mind and don't say I didn't tell you to approach with caution.