Close Combat: First to Fight Reviews (Windows)

ESRB Rating
Critic Score
100 point score based on reviews from various critics.
User Score
5 point score based on user ratings.

User Reviews

There are no reviews for this game.

Our Users Say

Critic Reviews

MobyRanks are listed below. You can read here for more information about MobyRank.
Just keep watching each others back, and rely on your training, which apparently is quite good. You really can't ask for a more appropriate game at this time in our history, or a more realistic simulation that is actually easy to play.
Close Combat: First to Fight is een tactische shooter die door zijn verschillende moeilijkheidsgraden een gameplay biedt die kan variëren van een vrij traditionele shooter tot een eerder realistische tactische militaire ervaring.
Gameplay (Benelux) (Jun, 2005)
Een onderhoudende tactische 3D Shooter die, mits een betere afwerking, hogere toppen had kunnen scheren.
Gamers' Temple, The (Jun 13, 2005)
In spite of its issues I did find First to Fight enjoyable for the most part. The game’s setting and atmosphere made for some intense gaming sessions to the point where I caught myself feeling a mix of pride and joy whenever the attack choppers flew overhead and obliterated an enemy position. I just wish that the AI in the game was more consistent and that the campaign was longer. At six missions divided into a number of sub-missions, they game is just too short. If you start playing it on Monday and have a gaming session each night you can probably be through with it by the weekend.
GameSpot (Apr 25, 2005)
How much you end up enjoying Close Combat: First to Fight will hinge a lot on what your expectations are going in. If you were looking for the squad-based military shooter to end all shooters, this isn't it. While the game has enjoyable co-op play and some moments of great intensity, it feels rough around the edges, lacking the necessary refinement in both gameplay and presentation to make it easily recommendable. If you're just looking for a no-frills military shooter that you can play together with some buddies, then Close Combat: First to Fight will probably deliver what you're looking for.
GameZone (May 11, 2005)
In this great big world that we live in finding enjoyment in something is a difficult decision. Do you go to the movies, how about playing disc golf at a local park or maybe stay at home and play a videogame? Most of you reading this review will probably pick the later option, which is why you are here. If you are looking for the greatest FPS ever made then you will need to keep looking. But if you want an entertaining military FPS game, that can be a frustrating and aggravating at times, then First to Fight might be your game.
Game Chronicles (May 29, 2005)
single player does not intrigue you, perhaps multiplayer will help some. With the deluge of FPS games on the market though, and online focused ones like Unreal Tournament and BF 1942, the games that employ the “afterthought MP” really get trounced, and First to Fight is a prime example. You have your choice of death match and Co-op modes. The former is your standard elimination style game, while the latter has some merits worth mentioning. One player assumes team leader command and together you can play through all of the single player missions or campaign, a nice addition but sadly not enough to really save it. A mediocre multiplayer experience at best.
Armchair Empire, The (Jul 06, 2005)
The production values of the game were perfectly acceptable but not on the same level of flashiness of the current cream of the crop. The cut scenes are all done in-engine but at very low resolutions. Also, the audio is a little bit plain, and the Arabic chatter is a little repetitive. The graphics though I found to be quite crisp and clean. The environmental textures and variety leave something to be desired, but the character models and detail were very good. Overall the production values don't really add much to the experience, but nor do they take away anything from the gameplay. Multiplayer is included, and the co-operative mode is perfect for actually playing with others and trying to play as if your life depended on it by taking care of your assignment. Save for the promise of what could have been, First to Fight is quite entertaining. It's only too bad that some of the elements that were only loosely introduced could not have been made more of a focus or an option in the game.
Thunderbolt Games (Apr 19, 2005)
Close Combat: First to Fight gets some things right, but if the poor AI and numerous glitches were ironed out then it could have been one of the finest tours of duty around. As it stands, it’s an excellent multiplayer game that just can’t compete with some of its rivals. If modern combat and multiplayer are your bag then check Close Combat. Otherwise, Brothers in Arms is much more worthy of your attention.
ActionTrip (May 06, 2005)
Would I recommend this game to you? If you're a hardcore military buff, I might recommend it to you for the fun firefights. Other than that, I think you're better off getting SWAT 4. That one flows much better and has a much nicer feel to it. Two very important qualities that are crucial to the art of making love to a woman. Or so people tell me. (Or as a safety net, a credit card with a very high limit -Ed.)
GamersMark (May 22, 2005)
Oddly, I found the shooting of endless hordes of zombies in Deadhunt much more fun than playing this game. While First to Fight has a few good points about it, it does not live up to what it claims it is, and is "realistically" only a less than average FPS. Possibly the greatest fault of the game is the price tag it totes: an MSRP of $39.99. If the game were priced for a budget release, maybe half of what it is currently, this game could be worth a look to the FPS enthusiast.
Absolute Games ( (May 19, 2005)
Грустно констатировать, но вынесенная в подзаголовок «лакмусовая бумажка» помогает многим несознательным разработчикам придерживаться канонов жанра. Не поддавайтесь на уловки. First to Fight бесконечно далека от Ghost Recon, Hidden & Dangerous 2 и других игр с претензией на реализм. Перед нами не тактический шутер (в том смысле, который мы привыкли вкладывать в это словосочетание) и, тем паче, не «Close Combat от первого лица», а «перепевка» Delta Force: Black Hawk Down. Со всеми вытекающими отсюда преимуществами и недостатками.
Game Vortex (May 17, 2005)
While not the most polished title around, Close Combat: First to Fight should give you wannabe-jarheads out there enough of a fight for a while, especially in the decent Co-op mode. Too bad the lackluster A.I., graphics, and sound ultimately hold this game back in the second-rate level of gaming. Do your country and yourself more honor by checking out those acclaimed games mentioned in this review.
Worth Playing (Jul 13, 2005)
All in all, First to Fight is a rough outing. While I would not label First to Fight as a bad game, I would say that First to Fight is a good concept and core set of design ideas that have been poorly implemented. Personally, I would have rather not seen the Close Combat franchise go this route, and I hope that Destineer and 2K Games return to the game's original concept because as it is, Close Combat was the only game of its kind. What we are left with now is a tactical FPS that fails to distinguish itself from other games in the genre. Sure, the game looks beautiful and with some patches, the gameplay issues, glitches and sound bugs can be fixed to make First to Fight into a decent game.
G4 TV: X-Play (Jun 15, 2005)
Close Combat: First to Fight is an agreeable kind of game so long as you lower your expectations a bit. Even though the game is base on tools used by the military, it’s really fairly shallow in how military tactics are used. First to Fight is a tactical shooter for the beer and pretzels crowd.
GameSpy (May 27, 2005)
Close Combat: First to Fight's flawed A.I. and abbreviated single-player game certainly don't advance the FPS genre in a significant way, but its entertaining multiplayer component scores a welcome bull's-eye. And, as any Marine will tell you, it's all about the men beside you.
55 (Apr, 2005)
Close Combat ne semblait pas être un mauvais jeu, mais certaines lacunes lui font vraiment défaut. On reprochera donc aux développeurs d’avoir voulu faire un jeu beaucoup trop grand public pour être crédible. Si vous êtes un amateur de FPS tactique, tournez vous en ce moment vers Swat 4 ou Rainbow Six 3. Si par contre vous êtes simplement en quête d’un nouveau jeu de tir qui vous changerait un peu de FarCry ou de HL², alors vous pourrez peut-être vous rabattre sur CCFTF, quand celui-ci sera sorti en occasion, ce qui ne devrait pas tarder.
50 (Apr 29, 2005)
Close Combat : First To Fight a beau avoir les outils et le potentiel d'un jeu tactique, son IA, la taille de ses cartes, sa linéarité et son manque de profondeur l'écartent de cette voie. On pourrait alors se croire face à un jeu d'action teinté de tactique, mais même pas, puisque dans ce domaine, il se montre trop poussif. Finalement, Close Combat est un jeu bâtard qui laisse froid. On est loin de son prestige dans le domaine de la STR/tactique.
In the end, it’s all just tedious. You’ll shoot hundreds of enemies by the time you finish, picking them out with your handy radar. You’ll have to reload through some cheap ambushes, which include things like enemies spawning behind you or forcing you to crawl out of a manhole into the middle of a street surrounded by snipers, machine gunners, and armored vehicles. Which, to be fair, is something Marines should be taught not to do. So if it’s ever used as a training tool, at least this tasteless bauble has that going for it.
1UP (Jul 25, 2005)
Close Combat: First to Fight isn't awful. As first-person shooters go, it's passable, saddled with the typical problems you'd find in a cheap game. It has horrible A.I. and ridiculous, mincing animation. The engine looks pretty good most of the time, but then shadows bleed through a wall or someone's gun pokes noticeably through a door. It's obviously an Xbox port, with its small levels and too tight field of view.