Thomas Leaf: This game looks to be the end-all of all shooters for me. In BIA, your primary concern is with maneuver and fire orders. Sure, you get to shoot, but as a squad leader, your goal is to get your fire support element into the right spot to lay down suppressing fires while you maneuver your assault element into position to flank and grenade fascist scum. This game also looks absolutely stunning and accurately models regions of hedgerows behind Normandy and chronicles 30 hours in the life of a real rifle squad from the 101st Airborne. I don't see how it gets better than this: amazing graphics, realistic combat, a true story about real soldiers, a fight you can get behind, real tactics and terrain. Brothers in Arms looks to be the gaming equivalent of "Band of Brothers" and if you haven't seen "Band of Brothers," then you must do so now.

Corey Owen: First person shooters are so plentiful that to make one stand out is an incredible feat, but Brothers in Arms attempts to do just that, with a plethora of innovative features. This game is not a run-and-gun action title, and the focus is definitely on strategy and careful use of your team so if you run out and blast away, you and your team will most assuredly die. This focus on the team not only carries over to gameplay, but in the story as well. Gearbox has gone to great lengths to make each character an individual with a unique personality and attitude to make you care about your team. The original multiplayer gameplay is what sparks the majority of my interest. Combing tactics with a first-person perspective, we could be in for another Pandora Tomorrow-esque revolution in multiplayer action. Two-on-two, 16-man, squad-based tactical first person shooter … with buzzwords like that, what could go wrong?