RecommendedSteam player
At least it doesn't cost 250 dollarsShow moreShow less
0.2 hours at review11,063 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
Gray Zone Warfare
Gray Zone Warfare combines tactical PvE missions, open exploration, and squad play with loot and reputation as its progression thread. At ≈ $14.94 from 
GAMIVO, it is at the tracked historical low for this comparison basis, making the current opportunity especially relevant for a planned entry. Solo players have a defined way to deploy, while groups can tackle operations together. The displayed rating and review count add useful context before purchase, but the game’s strongest appeal remains its deliberate tactical rhythm and open-ended island operations rather than a short, linear campaign. With ≈ $25.05 saved against Steam’s current price of $39.99, this offer gives the matched Standard a direct price advantage.
GAMIVOGray Zone Warfare - EN Global-63%from~ $14.94(~ €13.28)ALL-TIME LOWSave $25.05 vs SteamBuy nowAll-time low ~ $21.59across Steam & third-party storesat the recorded all-time low
Loading store offers
Wishlist price
Set a target to receive an email when an eligible offer in your selected region is at or below that amount.
Price History
Past 36 months · Updated dailyHistorical Low~ $18.302026-07Current Low Across Stores~ $35.09Kinguinvs. Historical Low+92%
Prices cover Steam and 39 authorized stores; only legitimate offers are counted. The chart shows weekly market-wide lows and Steam's official price across the past 36 months.
01About Gray Zone Warfare
Gray Zone Warfare is a PvE-first open-world tactical shooter set on Lamang, a quarantined Southeast Asian island torn apart by faction warfare. As an elite operator, explore, complete missions, collect loot, and earn reputation alone or with your squad. The Steam PC version supports single-player and co-op. English full audio and subtitles are available, with interface languages listed in Simplified Chinese, English, French, Italian, German, Spanish, Czech, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Portuguese-Brazil, and Turkish. Released on April 30, 2024; 72%% positive from 69,531 reviews.
Credits
Developer
MADFINGER Games, a.s.
Publisher
MADFINGER Games, a.s.
Lowest recorded in 36 months
$18.302026-07-30 · KinguinBase game · same records as the chart above; USD history, not a regional Steam low.Language support
| Language | Interface | Subtitles | Audio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Simplified Chinese | Yes | Yes | — |
| English | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| French | Yes | Yes | — |
Show 9 more languages
| Language | Interface | Subtitles | Audio |
|---|---|---|---|
| Italian | Yes | Yes | — |
| German | Yes | Yes | — |
| Spanish | Yes | Yes | — |
| Czech | Yes | Yes | — |
| Japanese | Yes | Yes | — |
| Korean | Yes | Yes | — |
| Polish | Yes | Yes | — |
| Portuguese-Brazil | Yes | Yes | — |
| Turkish | Yes | Yes | — |
Steam PC edition data · 2026-10-19
02Before you buy
Play modes
The Steam PC version supports solo play and squad-based co-op. Missions, loot, and reputation form the main progression loop.
Language
English full audio and subtitles are supported. The available interface languages are shown in {supportedLanguages}.
03Frequently asked questions
Where is Gray Zone Warfare set?
It takes place on Lamang, a quarantined Southeast Asian island shaped by faction warfare.
What is the main objective?
You play an elite operator who carries out missions, earns reputation, gathers loot, and investigates the event behind the conflict.
How does progression work?
The game includes weapons, weapon parts, gear, a redesigned loot system, and a replayable task structure.
Can I play solo or cooperatively?
You can deploy alone or with your squad.
7.5
Overall Score
Graphics8
Audio7.5
Gameplay8.5
Story5.5
Content6
“Tarkov-grade tactical extraction on a seamless 42 sq km island with real squadmates even solo, still floaty and thin in early access”
Our Verdict
Put every dimension on the table and Gray Zone Warfare resists a single number. It is at once a commercial miracle and an unfinished construction site, a game with realism deep enough to hook you and rough edges raw enough to make you throw the controller.
An underdog with no fanbase, and an honest review curve
Start with where it sits in history. MADFINGER, a Czech studio that had only ever shipped mobile games, walked into hardcore PC extraction shooters with no foothold and no fanbase whatsoever — and sold half a million copies in four days of early access, closed on 1.5 million in year one, took New Releases, Top Sellers, and Most Played placements on Steam's Best of 2024, and slipped into the platform's top 20 by gross revenue for the year. Those numbers say something on their own: there is a huge, real gap in the market for "realist extraction that is easier to get into than Tarkov."
Its review curve is just as honest, and arguably the more telling story. The launch ran into brutal optimization, server queues, and near-laser-accurate AI, dropping it to "mostly negative," with the Chinese-language storefront cratering near 17 percent positive and a concurrent peak of 73,000 falling off a cliff in the months after. Only when the studio patched the AI balance, the task system, and the localization release by release — clawing daily active players back to 125,000 and the rating up toward 80 percent on the back of updates like Spearhead 0.4 — did the trajectory turn. That arc of explosion, exodus, and recovery-by-patch tells you more about the game's real state than any one score.
Who should buy in, and who should wait
Which brings us to the practical question: should you jump in right now? The buyer profile is sharp. You crave the tension and depth of Tarkov-style realist extraction but cannot stomach its near-humiliating barrier of entry and its loneliness; you can live with early-access rough edges and are happy to grow alongside a game; and ideally you have a friend or two to run with, because this thing is all but built for moving through a huge map in the dark with people you trust. Lone wolves can play it, but the joy takes a haircut.
The "not yet" profile is just as clear. You want a shooter that is instant and fast; you hate trekking across half a map on foot; you have zero tolerance for early-access stutters, bugs, and missing content. For you the smarter move is the wishlist — let it raise a few more floors and sand the gunplay and the optimization smooth, then reconsider.
Last comes the question every editor loves to ask: will it be replaced? Its most direct rival is Escape from Tarkov, an immovable ceiling on looting depth, item economy, and hardcore detail that years of work built and Gray Zone is not catching short-term, with a real gap still showing in those areas. But on the strength of that seamless 42-square-kilometre map, the shared world of three factions, and a newcomer-friendly slope where even a solo queue gets real teammates, it has staked out a niche Tarkov simply cannot reach. The two are not even fighting over the same crowd: it is not here to kill Tarkov, but to catch everyone the cruelty and the wall of Tarkov turned away who still want that realist extraction dread. As long as that gap exists, so does its place. Overall, a 7.5 — a game pointed in exactly the right direction with enormous upside, but one you still have to play with the patience of knowing it is "only 20 percent finished." What it sells today is not completeness. It is that island, that simulation, and a promise being cashed in one patch at a time.
Popular Steam reviews
Native-language selection · 10 reviewsSelected helpful reviews in this language show both recommendations and criticisms. This selection does not represent the overall positive rating; opinions reflect the version reviewed.
Not recommendedSteam player
Game has a solid base but has many fundamental flaws that needs fixing or a complete rework, here's what I think: - Performance is not good, but wasn't much of an issue for me since I have a very good PC. - Intentionally teamkilling is from what I can tell completely unpunished and rewarded. I was teamkilled twice. The first time I tried asking a teammate nearby if they want to join me on a quest, and they proceeded to knife me. I tried to get back quickly to get my revenge, but they took all my loot and left the server before I could. Second time was in the starting village. Simply got shot in the back while helping clear AI. Thought maybe it was an accident, but went back and my body was fully looted by them. Chased them down and they shot at me again, this time I returned fire and eventually got my gear back. Really not sure how to fix this. Maybe some form of "was this teamkill intentional?", or reverse friendly fire. It's one of those issues where it's weird if the game removed it completely, but is damaging the game by having it included. Friendly fire works in games like Arma or Squad since there's no motivation to do it. Usually its a genuine accident, or its intentional but gets punished quickly. In an extraction shooter its a completely different story. If it goes unpunished, they only gain from killing me. - People saying AI is on-par or better than Scavs in Tarkov are flat out wrong. AI in this game are a complete joke. Sometimes they just stand still while you wipe out their friends 3 feet in front of them. Other times they lock on you from miles away. Their health seems wildly inconsistent. Had a few times where I would headshot them 4-5 times with an M4, and they just eat it up. Without a helmet too. - Quests are flat out boring and don't interest me. After playing thousands of hours in Tarkov, these "go grab this", "go check out this place" quests don't motivate me at all. Half of my playtime I was just exploring the map and that was way more fun than doing quests. Also some of the quests I had we're extremely vague on where to go, which led to being bored while mindlessly running around trying to find the right building. I think its fine to have some quests like Tarkov. But I think this game would be perfect to incorporate something like Arma 3: Wasteland gamemode missions. Imagine having dynamic quests around the map that your faction, or even multiple factions see. Imagine this, what sounds more interesting: A personal quest asking you to retrieve documents from a building in town? Or, a server-wide mission, saying "Hey, there's an armed convoy carrying a shipment of explosives, we really need those supplies." And you gather as many teammates at base as possible, fly out there, and ambush this AI convoy. But oh wait, the other factions want this loot too, so now you have the AI convoy sandwiched between two or three large PMC groups. I don't know about you, but the latter sounds much more fun and dynamic to me. I'll be keeping tabs on the game. But for now, I think it's in too much of an early and flawed state to enjoy playing. Edit: Just some extra info - I get about 60-70 fps without DLSS, and 120-140 with DLSS. It's certainly playable for me, but DLSS being a requirement isn't ideal. It gives me a good amount of input delay. 4080, R7 7800x3D, 32gb ram. I understand its early access. I'm just stating that the quests are basic, and what I think would be a cool direction they could go with future quests. Saw a comment confused about getting "teamkilled" so I'll explain here. Each server is a 16v16v16 between the three factions. The other 2 factions are certainly hostile, but your own faction is supposed to be friendly. You all share the same spawn point, and you see all 15 other teammates marked on the map at all times. Those friendlies are the team kills I encountered. I wish there was a mixed review option, since that much more aligns with my opinions. Just the combination of the issues I addressed made for a bad first impression, doesn't mean I don't see the potential. I'll be playing more, and I'm excited to see what the future holds for this game! :)Show moreShow less
4.2 hours at review1,725 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
RecommendedSteam player
Tarkov for people with a job and a family.Show moreShow less
7.2 hours at review2,913 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
Not recommendedSteam player
Fun game. Level 28. Got plenty of time into the game. I however can't give it a Recommended until they apply fixes. -The AI and Enviroment. Almost all locations are riddled with bushes and trees. The AI can shoot through all of these. One bush, two bushes, all the layers of bushes? AI dont care. It becomes worse when you consider the AI is able to one-tap you from 100+ meters away with just a reflex sight, while sprinting towards you, with an AK. It's not fun gameplay, it's not good gameplay, and dying and losing your gear unnecessarily like that honestly ruins the gameplay experience. PS: The AI can and will shoot you through (non-seethrough) tents and it will hit. They will also shoot at buildings/solid objects that you're behind as if they have wallhacks. PPS: AI will often also be bullet sponges, even when shooting them in the head with the 5$ 55A1 rounds. Some AI will (logically) die with one shot to the head, meanwhile other AI will require half a mag before they die. This applies to any AI, even the ones with just an armor and no helmet. The above is why I quit the game today. Also minor things that will likely get fixed sooner or later. - Game crashes - Game disconnecting (and sometimes losing your equipped gear and your quests resettings due to it) - The constant stuttering. (this is temporarily fixed by disconnecting and reconnecting until you get a server that doesnt stutter) Oke, I'm done with my review (rant).Show moreShow less
90.6 hours at review1,495 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
RecommendedSteam player
PvE mode that doesn't cost £250 to playShow moreShow less
0.3 hours at review2,899 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
Not recommendedSteam player
I have spent a significant amount of time playing Gray Zone Warfare and initially enjoyed the core gameplay concept. The open-world tactical approach has a lot of potential. Unfortunately, my recent experience with the anti-cheat and support process left me with serious concerns about how moderation and account suspensions are handled. Approximately two weeks ago, my account was suddenly suspended for what support described as “repeated synthetic or assisted inputs detected in gameplay.” I do not use cheats, macros, scripts, or automation software. Because of this, I contacted support and fully cooperated with their investigation. During the investigation they requested extensive information about my system, including: my DxDiag system report details about my hardware specifications information about my Razer mouse and keyboard confirmation that I did not have Razer Synapse or macro software installed screenshots of my Windows mouse and keyboard settings I provided everything they requested in order to help clarify the situation. After almost 15 days, the ban was lifted and I was allowed to return to the game. However, support stated that their system still detected “synthetic inputs” but that they cannot disclose what triggered the detection for security reasons. From a player’s perspective, this process is frustrating and concerning. Being banned for two weeks for something I did not do, followed by a statement that a violation occurred but without any explanation or evidence, does not feel like a fair or transparent system. My issue is not simply the temporary suspension — it is the lack of transparency and accountability in the anti-cheat process. Players should have some form of meaningful explanation when their accounts are restricted, especially after cooperating fully with an investigation. Gray Zone Warfare still has potential as a game, but situations like this make it difficult to trust the moderation and anti-cheat systems. I hope the developers improve the clarity, transparency, and review process for anti-cheat cases so that players are not left in the dark about what actually triggered a suspension. If the developers ever provide clarification about what caused the detection in my case, I would gladly update this review.Show moreShow less
770.4 hours at review1,180 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
RecommendedSteam player
I imagine the bad reviews were expecting a fully released aaa game when they purchased gzw. Early access has literally been up for a few hours, there are some server issues atm causing lag but the devs have already said there investigating this issue, the game will be buggy, it will have issues but that is to be expected its day one of ea, i have had no issues with anything other than lag, dont buy into ea if your just going to review bomb the game and constantly moan in the discordShow moreShow less
1.7 hours at review2,884 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
Not recommendedSteam player
TL;DR: If you're okay with a very early access game that still has a lot of issues then I say get it! It's a load of fun when issues aren't happening. When they do happen though, it will frustrate you to no end. If you do decide to get it, I would highly recommend getting the base edition first to see if it's the right fit for you. The edition upgrades are classed as DLC so they are not eligible for a refund if you decide you do not like it. I still cannot recommend it to the average gamer yet however so as of now, it will stay as not recommended. --- EDIT: 5/2/24 --- After two days, I finally was able to obtain my supporter edition items after a character reset. I anticipated this would be the fix, so I haven't really played since the first night, but I will update my original review after the hotfixes to see how things have been improving. --- EDIT: 5/8/24 --- After Hotfix 3, a major issue where servers would depopulate after 30-45 minutes has been resolved. This game has been making major improvements within the first weeks of it's release. My review will still remain as Not Recommended until they get a handle on server performance, crashes, and optimization. -- END OF EDIT -- THE BAD: During the first few days, I encountered issues with getting my supporter edition items and loot from missions, however this was fixed with a character reset introduced in Hotfix 2. PERFORMANCE: Performance and Optimization is not good. I have an i7-12700kf and a 3070ti with 32GB of RAM, and I struggle to get 60 FPS on high settings. (On the latest drivers). SERVER PERFORMANCE: Audio constantly cuts in and out, and rubber banding is a constant issue, which gets worse the longer you're in the server. Server performance definitely needs improvements. AI dying is delayed, sometimes they drop a couple seconds after being shot TEAM DYNAMIC: Teamkilling is slowly getting better, but is still a more common than it should be issue. I still stand by the idea that teamkilling needs to either have punishments or maybe if you get teamkilled, your loot cannot be taken by friendly forces. Removing it completely however does not make sense for this kind of game. Some servers, you get Seal Team Six qualified teammates, other times you get teammates that blast you after you announce yourself 5 times and then act shocked. It really depends. GAMEPLAY: The Movement, gunplay, and AI needs a lot of work. AI is pretty tanky and inhuman. They just stand there, and then when they aggro, unless you get a nice clean headshot, sometimes you clear an entire mag before they drop. On this note, AI can see you through bushes and start blasting even when you haven't laid your eyes on them yet. They definitely need to add a reaction to AI when they are shot, I completely understand that a shot to the vest won't kill them, however, they should at least fall/kneel over in pain. To add to this point, it's also frankly very frustrating when AI insta one-taps you to the head. It's clear that there isn't a suppression effect for AI. Movement is very choppy, buggy animations, and teleport vaulting (I just appear on the other side of the wall with no animation periodically). LOOTING: This is a hard topic to really give an answer on, with looting, I feel like I don't come back with much new gear even after a successful run. The looting needs work, but this is out of my scope to give an answer on what should change. GENERAL BUGS: The headless glitch seems to have been fixed in Hotfix 3, I haven't seen anymore headless characters yet. Another issue I noticed is that completing the first mission for the medic lady (forgot her name off the top of my head) I handed over the required item, and it took it from my inventory but still asked me to hand it over and the mission remained incomplete. I'm going to run the mission again and see if it works the second time around. BEWARE: edition upgrades are classed as DLC so you can't get the money back if you decide to refund. The OK/GOOD: GUNPLAY: Gunplay isn't TERRIBLE but it's not great either. For the type of game this is, I was expecting guns to feel a little more powerful. Gunplay is in an "arcady" state right now IMO. The M4 power wise is great, the AK on the other hand, I'm not really sure if it's bugged, but it just feels so much weaker than the M4. I've noticed it takes a lot more hits to kill with an AK vs M4 even using FMJ. Reloading the base SKS, your character must have arthritis in his hands or something because dear lord is the reload painfully slow. Pistols also need a lot of work power wise, they look and sound great, but it shoots like it's a toy replica. GRAPHICS: Frankly, The graphics are good. They are satisfying and immersive visuals. The only gripe I have for graphics is targets downrange can be VERY hard to see. Grayzone is frankly a beautiful game. HEALTH SYSTEM: The health system is really cool as well. It's immersive enough that you have to take a second to decide the best treatment of your conditions, but not too immersive to the point of needing a PHD to understand it EXTRACTION: The Base and LZ systems are also good. I like that you get the emotional satisfaction of physically extracting the AO. The UI/Inventory system, is passable for an Alpha build. No praises but no gripes either as of now. It's just very barebones atm. Conclusion: Grayzone is a promising game that released a little earlier than it probably should have for it's own good. With time, I feel like it will be a great game. At this time however, I cannot recommend it for the general gamer. For gamers that are okay with very early access, I say go for it. If you're the type of gamer that likes a little bit of polish, this game isn't there quite yet.Show moreShow less
1.4 hours at review963 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
RecommendedSteam player
tarkov but less scummyShow moreShow less
0.2 hours at review1,951 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
Not recommendedSteam player
Firstly, I just want to start off by saying I was IN LOVE with the concept and idea of another Tarkov-like game of the scale, and I DO realize that I only have 22 hours on this game, although I wish I had many many more, but 90% or more of those hours are in the first two days after I had purchased the best supporter edition, so i did "no life it" for a few days before I realized what was happening over the course of the initial month of release, and this review is more based on the EARLY ACCESS DEVELOPMENT AND PATCHING aspect rather than the game itself. Although I WILL say some things about the game itself. For benefit of the actual point of this review, I will keep the game-play part short and sweet. So to start off with that, YES, the game is VERY fun, has a very good concept, a very good game world/map, gorgeous graphics and immersion, good sound design other than a few bugs, a very good vision for what it COULD be, and all in all, the game DOES play "good enough for early access" for literally anyone who enjoys the base idea of an extraction looter shooter to enjoy as much as they want, for however long of a time period they deem worth it to enjoy in their own personal opinion. HOWEVER, sadly the actual issues with this game are less about "is it fun? Is it a good game?" (because it IS fun and a good game), and more about "what in the world have we been paying to support" in the sense that it is in a VERY unfinished feeling state as far as, the AI realism, a lot of mechanics not working being bugged or missing completely, the ongoing PvP war having basically NO point, having unique loot to pick up other than food, overall quest flow, bugs, balancing, tuning, graphical issues, network issues, server issues, compatibility issues, and ESPECIALLY over everything else - the optimization, I can keep going but you probably get the idea by now, and if you dont; (TLDR) = THE ACTUAL ISSUES ARE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GAME IN GENERAL OVER THE FIRST 6 MONTHS. Now, again, I do know its early access, I bought into it knowing that, and knowing I was going to be paying for an unfinished product to test, that things will have to be ironed out of over the course of early access until full release, however long that may be, and I am not saying that all those things are completely unacceptable, as they are the typical early access issues of a game, and they have nothing to do with me giving a negative review. I AM however saying that the fact that this game was released on Apr 30, 2024, and as of the date of this review on Nov 5, 2024, where has our support money for development gone? what development have we gotten for the game other than a few irrelevant hotfixes? what issues or features have been smoothed out, added, or removed, over the last 6 months? The sad answer to that is they have done NOTHING with this game, yet continue claiming they have this crazy roadmap in their heads that i'm sorry, just simply does not exist or is not being acted upon. They have acted like a kid who keeps telling their mom "yeah ill clean my room in 5 minutes I promise" yet it never gets done. I cannot and will not recommend this game to anyone EVER, even if they release an insanely huge patch tomorrow that fixes all the issues that i stated, based on the FACT that there is NO and I mean NO reason anything should be taking half a year to address and fix literally ANYTHING at all for how much they charged for the game. (No, I have no complaints about the pricing, I paid what I paid for it because I wanted to) This game was not marketed as "hey guys its just about done, so we are gonna put it in early access to PURCHASE as basically a demo and flesh out these couple things to give it a proper 1.0 release soon", they said "this is in a very early state and we will be working basically around the clock to give you the full experience this game can give you as soon as we can" and they are treating the game as if it is already 99% done and fixed which is unfair to the supporters. Its my own fault for buying in to an early access title that ended up this way, and I am the only one to blame for my frustration and money loss, I am not mad at those things although they are upsetting. I am simply saving anyone else the same struggle of purchasing a game that clearly is not being taken seriously by its developer, probably will never be finished, and if it ever is, it will be completely irrelevant by that time because it is a PvP game at its core and other players playing it alongside you is what would keep a game like this going, by the time this would be done we will all be 6 feet under based on the fact that we basically have had no development towards the game on top of the initial product for half a year making this a complete waste of your money. Sorry devs, all in all you had a great game and could have made this better than the other survival extraction shooters, but you completely failed and need to own up to that. ***Edit*** Sorry everyone who we were all having a good debate with in the comments, some people (they know who they are). Just simply cannot read, some cannot handle reality, and others cannot handle the fact that this is MY review and if we wanted to hear their full opinion we would go look at their non-existent review of the game, this wasn't meant for arguments, I truthfully dont care about the opinions of people who just try to yell or bash others, so I have disabled comments. ***2nd Edit - December 3rd 2024*** The devs are now literally replying to negative steam reviews saying their development cycle is "based around 6 month updates". They are literally now lying on the review section of the platform to try to save face about what they initially said about the early access development of this game. Their original "plan for development" was never "get an update every 6 months", nobody in their right mind would have bought the game if that were the case, and even then, should we be thanking them for a broken night time mode that nobody asked for where somehow the AI is worse than before, and multiple game breaking bugs and issues still exist since day 1? An entire 7 month wait for THIS? Was it well worth waiting 7 months for this broken update that only really added in a different time of day and a hotfix a day after to fix the completely broken AI that they had to roll back on YET AGAIN? Don't listen to it. Save your money.Show moreShow less
22.1 hours at review795 people found this helpful
Written during Early Access
Source: original Steam user reviews. Helpful votes are an archived snapshot, not live data. Last collected: 08/15/2026.