BlackMill Games has spent more than a decade exploring the battlefields of the First World War, but Gallipoli feels like an especially interesting direction for the series. While Verdun, Tannenberg and Isonzo have already covered several of the conflict’s better-known European fronts, this fourth entry turns its attention to the Ottoman Empire, with battles taking place across the Gallipoli Peninsula and Mesopotamia. That change of setting immediately gives the game a distinct character. The beaches, arid landscapes, ancient ruins, trenches and imposing hills create an atmosphere that feels very different from the muddy European battlefields that have become synonymous with WW1 games. More importantly, Gallipoli understands that this setting should influence the way battles feel rather than merely provide a different backdrop. The result is a multiplayer FPS that is deliberately unforgiving, but also unusually good at making every few meters of progress feel meaningful.
The opening moments are a good indication of what to expect. Landing at ANZAC Cove, for example, places attacking soldiers beneath enormous hills while enemy fire can erupt from seemingly impossible distances. There is a genuine sense of vulnerability as the landing develops, and that feeling continues once the fighting moves inland. Gallipoli doesn’t have a traditional narrative campaign to carry its historical subject matter; instead, its sense of narrative emerges from the battles themselves. A promising attack can gradually stall, a defensive line can suddenly collapse, or a desperate final push can turn an apparently lost match around. The new Expedition mode is particularly effective in this regard, using a Momentum system to give attacking and defending teams more reason to think about the overall flow of a battle rather than simply accumulating kills. Capturing objectives and inflicting losses can build attacking momentum, while the defenders are rewarded for holding their ground and wearing down the offensive. It gives the matches a convincing ebb and flow, even if the limited number of maps and the single principal game mode inevitably raise questions about long-term variety.
The gunplay is where Gallipoli really establishes its identity. This is not a shooter where players can sprint into the open, empty a magazine and expect to survive. Most encounters are built around bolt-action rifles and other period weapons, with accurate shots being extremely lethal and reloads taking enough time to make mistakes genuinely consequential. Lee-Enfields, Mausers and Martini-Henrys all have their own character, while bayonets, rifle grenades and heavier weapons add some welcome tactical options. The weapons feel substantial rather than interchangeable, and that weight gives successful shots considerably more satisfaction. Gallipoli also introduces more involved weapon handling, meaning that interrupted reloads and bolt-cycling sequences have to be completed before the weapon can be fired properly again. It is a small but effective mechanic because it makes panic under fire mechanically relevant instead of merely cosmetic.
Suppression and stamina build on that philosophy. Sustained enemy fire can leave soldiers increasingly compromised, affecting their ability to aim and handle their weapons, while exhaustion can make movement and shooting less reliable. This makes taking cover an actual tactical decision rather than a temporary pause between firefights. Heavy machine guns are particularly effective demonstrations of this design. Setting up a Maxim or Vickers in the right location can lock down an important route and give an attacking team serious problems, but the moment that weapon starts making an impact, its position becomes a priority target. That creates a pleasing risk-and-reward dynamic, although some of the game’s systems and class roles can take a while to understand. Gallipoli is more approachable than a full military simulation, but it still expects players to learn how its battlefield functions. Newcomers who ignore the squad structure and simply rush towards objectives are likely to spend a considerable amount of time looking at the respawn screen.
That emphasis on cooperation extends to the ten available classes, which give players meaningful ways to contribute beyond simply shooting enemies. Medics, engineers, machine gunners, snipers, scouts and other roles each have distinct responsibilities, while different kits allow some classes to specialize further. Construction and support mechanics also help create a sense that the frontline is being built and maintained by the soldiers occupying it. We particularly like that Gallipoli doesn’t treat support roles as lesser alternatives to the supposedly exciting classes. A well-positioned machine gun, useful reconnaissance, effective suppression or a defensive structure can have just as much impact on the outcome as a high kill count. The downside is that this design relies heavily on players actually cooperating, and the experience loses some of its intensity when a server isn’t sufficiently populated. The inclusion of bots is therefore useful, and the AI is capable enough to make mixed player-and-bot matches worthwhile, although it can still behave inconsistently and isn’t always dependable when it comes to support actions such as reviving or healing.
The maps are another major strength, and Gallipoli benefits enormously from the decision to depict several different environments rather than focusing exclusively on the peninsula. ANZAC Cove’s enormous slopes make the attacking side feel exposed, while locations around historic landmarks such as the Arch of Ctesiphon provide a striking combination of ancient architecture and modern industrial warfare. Some maps also introduce traversal or objective-specific situations that give particular classes additional importance, creating battles that feel shaped by their geography instead of simply being rectangular arenas filled with objectives. This is an area where BlackMill Games’ experience with its previous titles appears to have paid off. The terrain can still be harsh and occasionally confusing when first encountered, but the layouts generally encourage the close-range clashes and coordinated advances that the game’s mechanics are built around.
On PS5, the visual presentation does a great deal to sell that sense of place. The weapons, uniforms and environmental details are carefully modelled, while the lighting is arguably the game’s most impressive visual feature. Smoke, sunlight and shadows can dramatically alter what can be seen across the battlefield, and this isn’t merely a cosmetic effect. A distant soldier can disappear into haze, while changing light can make an otherwise safe-looking position suddenly feel exposed. The indirect lighting used throughout the environments is particularly effective in the dusty Mesopotamian locations, where the surrounding atmosphere gives weapons and buildings a subtly different appearance depending on the light around them. It isn’t a flawless AAA production and some visual elements lack the sheer polish of the biggest modern shooters, but the art direction and environmental detail do an excellent job of compensating.
The audio is similarly successful. Rifles have considerable punch, machine guns dominate the soundscape when they open up, and explosions have enough weight to make nearby combat genuinely uncomfortable. The soundtrack is a surprisingly effective addition as well, because it generally stays restrained before rising at moments when the battle begins to turn. We normally wouldn’t consider a prominent musical score essential to a grounded multiplayer shooter, but here it helps give major pushes and defensive stands a sense of occasion without completely overwhelming the battlefield audio. There is still room for a busier soundscape, particularly when it comes to the human element of battle, with more distant voices, cries and general battlefield commotion potentially making the environments feel even more alive. Even so, the combination of gunfire, explosions, smoke and music does a fine job of maintaining tension.
The controls ultimately serve the same philosophy as the rest of the game. Gallipoli wants movement, aiming and weapon handling to feel deliberate rather than frictionless, and that can initially feel somewhat cumbersome compared with contemporary shooters. There are also some modern conveniences missing from the formula, such as weapon mounting and leaning, while the standard HUD can present an unusually large amount of information at once. The latter is at least configurable, allowing players to remove some of the interface clutter in favour of a more immersive presentation. We would recommend doing so, because the battlefield itself communicates enough information without constantly covering the screen in markers, feeds and status indicators. The deliberately slower handling isn’t something everyone will appreciate, but it fits the developer’s broader approach and gives the PS5 experience a satisfying physicality when moving between cover, preparing a shot or completing a reload under pressure.
Our biggest concern is therefore not the quality of Gallipoli’s core experience, but how much mileage players will get from it. With a relatively focused multiplayer structure, a limited map selection and progression that mostly provides modest improvements to classes and weapon handling alongside cosmetic rewards, the game has to rely heavily on the strength of its moment-to-moment combat. Fortunately, that combat is strong enough to carry it for quite a while. Gallipoli is at its best when a squad is working together, a machine gun is suppressing an enemy position, smoke obscures an advancing force and somebody finally manages to land the shot that opens a route forward. Those situations are considerably more memorable than the usual multiplayer grind because the game makes survival, positioning and teamwork feel like achievements in themselves.
Gallipoli isn’t trying to reinvent the historical multiplayer FPS, nor does it need to. Instead, BlackMill Games has taken the accumulated experience of Verdun, Tannenberg and Isonzo and applied it to one of the First World War’s less frequently explored theatres. The result is a game with excellent atmosphere, weighty and distinctive weapons, impressive maps and a combat system that rewards patience and cooperation. Its limited variety, demanding learning curve and dependence on populated matches prevent it from being an entirely effortless recommendation, while some interface and AI issues keep it from feeling completely polished. Still, when the teams are communicating and the battle is flowing properly, Gallipoli creates exactly the sort of tense, chaotic and unexpectedly dramatic multiplayer warfare that this series has always aimed for. We found ourselves enjoying it most when we stopped treating it like a conventional FPS and started treating every advance, every position and every shot as something that had to be earned. For fans of historical shooters, and particularly existing followers of BlackMill Games’ WW1 Game Series, that makes Gallipoli an easy recommendation.
Score: 8.1/10