PlayStation 2 Critic Reviews

Despite its quirks and graphics that fall short of the original's, Naval Ops: Commander packs enough firepower to keep fans of the series stoked. Nonfans, however, may quickly get left in its wake. [May 2004, p.65]

A deeper, better game than "Naval Ops: Warship Gunner," an RTS-lite with gobs of replay value...I just hope the next entry in the series addresses its weak graphics and lack of multiplayer.

I would not recommend this for too many teenagers and below, because the action is more slowly paced and more emphasis is placed on technical specs of your ship than graphical wizardry during the battles.

The control scheme is a bit clumsy, especially when trying to perform resource management or save a game. The graphics aren't exactly first cabin, either, although the sound effects are stellar. [Apr 2004, p.40]

Graphically, things haven't much improved from last time, but the 80+ new missions, more comprehensive ship designs, and added weapons make for a solid follow-up to a genre-busting first game.

A pretty dry game that's a little too light on the action for people who don't like an equal dose of slowly paced strategy, but if you're as much into customizing your own ship as you are blowing other ships to pieces, Naval Ops: Commander might be for you.

Unfortunately, my impressive creation was forced to engage in mundane missions and unexciting encounters - it was like watching Superman pay bills or walk the dog. [Apr 2004, p.98]

Had the graphics been retouched a bit, the pace been picked up, the sound been reworked, and multiplayer been considered, this could've been the luxury yacht of war games.

I feel the game is lacking in direction. It feels like a make-work project with too-similar objectives and the putting of parts together. As far as I'm concerned, this game is just a piece of ship.

While the action portion of Commander is a leaky dinghy, the strategy elements are the Titanic, pre-iceberg. [May 2004, p.82]