Just Dropping In: Section 8 – Prejudice

What is war good for? Men whose job it is to put fiery backgrounds on things.
TimeGate have released a trailer for their sequel to Section 8, Prejudice, and you can take a look at that below. Seems like they missed a trick by not calling it Section 9, but who am I to judge the naming exploits of the wider world when I work for a site called Rock, Paper, Shotgun? The trailer shows some lavish new maps, lots more thunderous robo-biff, including the big bots throwing each other about, and dudes getting stabbed. So I think we can expect more of the same only, as the trailer insinuates, it might have evolved a bit.


  1. LewieP says:

    Some single player please. Section 8 looked kick ass with all the special moves and jumping around, but multiplayer manshooting isn’t really my thing.

    • Rich says:

      I think your site pointed out an offer that looked really good, until I realised it was a bunny-hopping pwnfest. Not that you’d get that impression from the trailers. They always manage to make them look epic, with lots of scripted sequences.

    • Dominic White says:

      I honestly can’t say I’ve seen ANY bunny-hopping in Section 8. The closest thing to that is jetpacking ,but you can only do one full burst jump every 10 seconds or so, and there’s the autotracking/lock-on feature that lets you skeet-shoot guys right outta the sky. It’s super-heavyweight stuff. Guys take a huge pounding before they go down, and actually feel like they’re wearing a half-ton of power armor with an energy shield on top.

    • LewieP says:

      @Rich and anyone else who cares.

      Indeed, £2.86 delivered, and it is still in stock:
      link to savygamer.co.uk

    • Rich says:

      OK, I was just exaggerating to convey my general contempt for all multi player only(ish) games. If it ain’t got a campaign, preferably a well written one, I ain’t interested.

      Mostly what I was getting at, was that this trailer and the one for it’s predecessor, indeed for all games of this type, tend to imply an epic story. In reality, the story serves as an excuse to fight.

    • Alexander Norris says:


      Anyone know if it still has players? At that price it’s cheap enough for me to be interested.

    • Alexander Norris says:

      Bah, they charge shipping outside the UK, so it’s not worth it. Sadface. :(

    • Zyrxil says:

      Anyone know if it still has players? At that price it’s cheap enough for me to be interested.

      It doesn’t. Basically, their launch and post-launch support was a mess, and they weren’t interested in fixing it.

  2. fearian says:


    Iron Man?! :O What are you doing here?

  3. Dood says:

    I really hope this installment will be more successful than the original Section 8. I played that one during the beta, and it was quite promising. A little more variety in the maps would have been nice though.

    But it looks like no one is playing Section 8 anymore. My guess is that this is at least partly due to false expectations of the players. Many people approached this game expecting something like CoD or Halo, where you can go on killing sprees all by yourself. Section 8 on the other hand is focused on teamplay. During a normal one on one firefight you lose so much of your armor that you cant really take on another enemy without reparing. As soon as you move about with your squad and focus fire on single enemys, you can really kick ass.

    I hope they keep the focus on teamplay for the sequel. They just need to do a better job of communicating this to the players, since most people tend to think: “Space Marines = Lone Wolf Rambo Action”

    • Alexander Norris says:

      As a long-term Battlefield player, that actually bothered me. I hated the fact that what decided a fight had nothing to do with positioning (i.e. flanking/surprise attacks) or skill and literally everything to do with how many people were involved in the fight. You’d fighting anyone was an exercise in frustration because either one of you would die leaving his opponent on 5% health, to be ganked by the next enemy who feels like shooting in your vague direction, or else you’d be fighting against two enemies and it would be literally impossible for you to win because of the way the game was built.

      That last part is what especially bothered me. If I can make intelligent use of terrain and surprise, I should be able to take on more than one enemy and win. In Section 8, you could only really do that with the knife because it was an instakill. It’s a damn shame, because had the guns dealt a little more damage and had there not been a lock-on feature, I’d probably have loved the game to bits. I sincerely hope the sequel is more to my liking, because we need as many Battlefield-like games as humanly possible.

  4. oceanclub says:

    I’m surprised there’s a sequel as I thought the original did abysmally?


    • Chaz says:

      Yeah same here. I didn’t think the some what middling reviews and lack luster sales the first one got would have warranted a sequel, but obviously I’m wrong.

  5. nine says:

    I’m glad there’s a sequel but when I picked this up on launch day for PC there were a grand total of Two australian servers with players online. How the crap did they get funding for a sequel?????

  6. Tei says:

    Section 8 can be described has the movement types of Tribes, with the gameplay of RTCW / Quake Wars. It also have great graphics and big maps.
    But is not a popular game. Why? no idea. Is a fact that some games are popular and others no. Anyway this don’t seems to harm S8 enough, since you always have people to fight.
    Maybe what has really harmed Section8 on the long term, so is not a superpopular game, is some “consoley” feel on it, and the existence of other games like Modern Warfare2 and Team Fortress 2, that act like powerfull blackholes that suck all gamers, so theres not much more people around.

    Its also, like Tribes, high-fantasy themed in future super soldier and mechanical metal everything. I love sci-fi, but most parts of Trib.. Section 8 breaks my suspension of disbelief. Maybe the “floaty” nature of a consoley game make this worse.

    The other thing that has really harmed Section 8 is, IMHO, that has not a long term grind investment of unlockables. Unlockables adds to games a feel of personal and community progression and achievement. Games withouth unlocables feel like a Civi game with the option “Start the game in the modern era” fixed, so you can’t start in the ancient eras.

    Or maybe Section 8 is not popular, because lack of money to invest in ads, and some finne tunning to make the game feel completelly great.

  7. Dominic White says:

    Section 8 bombed on the PC, but it seems to have done better on consoles. There’s plenty of servers (yes, dedicated servers, with server browser and everything) running for the PS3 version, which I got at a nice budget price.

    So yeah, bring on the sequel. When you’ve got a decent number of people online, it’s pretty great.

    • Harlander says:

      Yeah, the RPS games we had back in the day were pretty delightful, even if I kept getting repeatedly killed by this one guy.

  8. Dhatz says:

    no wonder thay overlaid the sounds, they suck multiple asses.

  9. Bossman says:

    I think Section 8 failed because there are already tons of other teambased multiplayer shooters and people just don’t have enough time to play all of them. They should go back to their roots and start working on Kohan 3.

  10. Greg Wild says:

    I enjoyed the Beta for Section 8 hugely… but with such a piss poor launch and generally quiet community I’m quite surprised they’re making a sequel admittedly.

    Though I’d like to hope this one works out. We desperately need a new Tribes :D

  11. Waaat? says:

    Very surprised this is getting a sequel.

    Now where is my new Kohan

  12. Jamesworkshop says:

    I think this should be called

    proposition 8 – Prejudice

    then it can get repealed in california

  13. Mashakosha says:

    I’m another one of those people who was in love with the beta, yet severely disappointed at the full game. I can’t really put my finger on why though, try as I may. I keep thinking “Hey, maybe I’ll reinstall it.” but even for an achievement whore like me, I just can’t justify it properly.

  14. 1nightStand says:

    This been-there-done-that-everything-stays-the-same tired tone of the trailer backfires on them- it echoes what I feel about their game.

  15. Pop says:

    Section 8 looked cool, but I got annoyed that firefights seemed pretty arbitrary. Either I’ve got better armour than you, in which case I win otherwise you win. That’s fine, but everyone looked the same!

    It’d been nice to have been able to tell as in TF2 who the heavies are and who the scouts are before you open fire. That probably would have helped people coordinate a bit more.

  16. Muscles says:

    The game failed (at least on the PC) because you literally had to jump through 20 fucking hoops to get your server (with stats) online. Not only that, but the multiplayer was very unoptimized. Even the most powerful server had a hard time handling the maximum amount of players, and everyone’s ping was bloated as well.

    Additionally, they decided that they would release new map packs, but with a price. Now this is an okay decision when you have a HUGE playerbase (like CoD), but when your game is barely fucking breathing, I have no idea why you would split the playerbase with such a stupid business plan. Release some new maps for free, attempt to fix the lag and optimization issues, and maybe the developers wouldn’t have had such a lousy mess in their hands.

    Needless to say, I won’t be buying this sequel.

  17. YogSo says:

    I love how the message of this trailer is “This is the same old, same old fighting against other people”. Great maketing line, for sure. Don’t wonder why Section 8 is not a big, popular game.

  18. Lucas says:

    I really liked Section 8, and played about 40 hours of the beta and 6 on retail. It did some interesting things with the positional teamplay, map control, lock-on, weapons and deployables and dynamic missions. When the retail game came and tanks showed up, the balance went downhill and the teamplay was lacking. I would guess the open beta cannibalized the potential player-base. The randomness of the dynamic objectives hurt too, because you couldn’t plan or strategize much for them, just show up and do what you can (and hope your team does too).

    It’s surprising to see it getting a sequel, given the apparent lack of sales and players, but I’m willing to give TimeGate the benefit of the doubt and hope they do as many new and interesting things with this version as they did the first. Lets wait and see.

  19. Inferno says:

    I really hope this is good AN takes off. Section 8 looked like a hell of a lot of fun but it was one of those games that no one played so no one bought it. A sort of catch 22 situation in gaming. If it’s really good I’ll try and convince a group to buy it because, damn I really wantto jetpack aound in multiplayer with pew pew lazors

  20. postmanX3 says:

    A sequel to one of my favorite games ever? One that practically no one plays? Am I dreaming?

  21. Lokku says:

    Section 8 was a good game. It was sweet when working with your squad. Spawn anyway so there was no camping, and the objective system kept things fresh and engaging. Game play wise my only complaint would be that it was pretty bland looking, very generic. SP was also just a tact on bit of tutorial.

    PC version was kinda messed up on released, from what i remember the server browser was messed up, giving back false results or something and you couldn’t join a proper game on a populated server. They took their sweet time patching this up, but that time i bet tons of players already left. And then they released a dlc map pack to split what was left of the playerbase. But the games i did have on proper server with good squad mates, was great hours of gaming tastiness.

  22. rxtx says:

    So noone else got the Ghost in the Shell reference?