bit-gamer.net

Medal of Honor Review

Comments 51 to 75 of 95

Reply
nicae 13th October 2010, 00:08 Quote
(double post, sorry)
Gunsmith 13th October 2010, 00:11 Quote
EA arent as bad as they used to be when compared to activision, personally i blame the "gamers"
nissanskyrice 13th October 2010, 03:10 Quote
I downloaded the BETA and played it for maybe a total 5 minutes. Utterly crap game. EA, I want that 5 minutes back.
south side sammy 13th October 2010, 03:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by nissanskyrice
I downloaded the BETA and played it for maybe a total 5 minutes. Utterly crap game. EA, I want that 5 minutes back.

Nothing in the world would make me believe that to be a fact. It took me more than 5 minutes to set the game up. IMO you're obviously biased. And I doubt you have any experience with FPS'. C'mon dude... ????
barit 13th October 2010, 03:35 Quote
Not another EA BF clone... they still have not fixed the disconnect issues from BFBC2. Can barely get a 10 minute game in if I am lucky to even get past the load screen.

20+ games on my PC and this is the only publisher that doesnt allow me to play the game I purchased. Make something new please!
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 13th October 2010, 05:04 Quote
Thanks Bit-tech for this honest review. Well any PC gamer could have written this review as most of us knew this game was gonna be crap.

As a PC gamer, sure I want instant action just as much as any other guy going to the bar on ladies night but cookie cutter FPS are DEAD. A 5 hour rail sp and a half-ass bolted on MP, c'mon man.

What happen to FPS being epic, adventurous, and enthralling? It's gonna take a good open world FPS/RPG or a adventure FPS to get my wallet open. (as I mark off days until STALKER 2 and HL2ep3)
1-0-1 13th October 2010, 06:42 Quote
Medal of Honor is still on pre-order (release date 15 October). I do not care too much about the single player but hopefully the mulitplayer can invoke a COD4 like state in me again.
The_Beast 13th October 2010, 07:38 Quote
Playing the beta felt like work, boring ass, can't wait for it to be over work, I'm surprised it got a 6 TBH



It felt like a MW2 and BFBC2's ******* child, but only taking the bad from each, or in MW2s case all of it :)
MorpheusUK 13th October 2010, 08:21 Quote
WOW, I can't believe the negative feedback I've been reading.
I for one can't wait (wait to be blown away ((by some 13 year old pimple faced noob probably)) or disappointed)
When it comes to these larger than life titles, I'm able to take myself out of the hype caused, I obviously do get excited but manage to steer clear of the hype, in doing so I don't get totally disappointed when it's not as epic as everyone and the media make out to be.
I played the MP and enjoyed it, MW" and BFBC2 **** child it may be, but then I am a fan of modern warfare like fps (not really one of alien or far future type fps games, not to say I don't like HL series, I can't wait til ep3)

I think when it comes to these titles I do feel the market is saturated by (no offense here) "American Soldiers save the world yet again with a bunch of highly trained specialized super invincible soldiers"
The world of FPS games needs a change in some way that will shake up the rest of the developers. Great graphics is one thing, great game play is another, but most recently I feel there needs to be a great story line that we have never seen before.
ABUSIVEMANGO 13th October 2010, 10:45 Quote
Being a massive COD MW and MW2 fan, I pre-ordered this not only to save a few quid but to actually break away from the hold COD has on me. I am worried abt the review?, kinda but so far its the most negative I've found.
I tend not to put too much belief into reviews unless they are holy negative to a level of hatred as there are bloody awlful games out there, but this it seems isnt one - I havent had a COD game yet where the multi-player isnt full of glitches for months and lets not all forget both COD's MW/MW2 are short missions on SP.

I will put down COD MW2 hopefully for me to give this the time and effort it deserves to enjoy , If it keeps me entertained for a few hours on inital play -brilliant - if not I'll simply look at trading it in.
Kiytan 13th October 2010, 11:11 Quote
nice to see an honest review. I also agree with the fact that there are waaay too many "realistic" (hah) military fps shooters out atm.

I think thats why borderlands did so well, it had a hell of a lot of flaws, but atleast it was different.
lacuna 13th October 2010, 12:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Quote:
Originally Posted by lacuna

Yep and yet it still gets a 6. Im going to have to assume that the scale actually only goes from 6 to 10 because nothing ever gets less than 6. I suppose publishers would stop sending games if reviewers marked them down too much though /cynicism

Bollocks to that. I gave a 4/10 just the other week. I've given 2/10s before. Problem is, because nobody cares about obviously rubbish games and because everyone can spot them a mile off, there's no reason for us to look at them. Would you really like us to review the utter dregs of the industry on a regular basis, bearing in mind you'd probably never buy it anyway? Wouldn't you rather we honestly assessed the games our readers might actually care about?

I gave Medal of Honor a 5/10 - ranked as 'has significant drawbacks', 'just meets expectations' and 'approach with caution' in the score guide - for the singleplayer, then threw another point on the pile for the multiplayer, because it's better than the SP.

I make a big effort to use the whole 1-10 scale and mark as fairly as possible. We're not bound up in PR crap and aren't pressured to give any game a particular score. If we were, we'd tell everyone about it.

Some of the 6 or lower reviews we've given this year, off the top of my head:
Sniper: Ghost Warrior
Crackdown 2
Blade Kitten
Silent Hunter 5
Alien Breed: Impact
Alpha Protocol
Global Agenda
Winter Voices: Avalance
Lost Planet 2
Necrovision: The Lost Company
Ship Simulator Extremes
Star Wolves 3: Civil War

TL,DR? Go play a real 3/10 or 2/10 game, then play Medal of Honor and tell me it's as bad as they are. It's bad, but it's not that bad.

/rant

I apologise for causing any offence but the unrelenting negativity throughout the review doesn't tally with the score. Surely 6/10 would mean that on balance the game has more positive aspects than it does negative but that isn't really what you said.
RonanH 13th October 2010, 12:28 Quote
So the review is almost entirely negative and yet it still receives a 6, do you mark from 5-10?
lp1988 13th October 2010, 14:50 Quote
And here I was hoping for some huge mountain maps, missions in tunnel systems and IED's.
Slavedriver 13th October 2010, 15:40 Quote
Too bad review does not mention horrid console interface and buttons which look like check boxes. Oh and gray maps with grey soldiers on grey background with grey friendly markers.
Oh and "Spawn on front" spawning you on the guy at your base.
Oh and the obvious uselessness of sniper rifles 'coz you can snipe from anything at all.
Oh and...
Ah, forget it. The 2 hours I spent on the beta were the worst 2 hours I spent that week.

On the scale of 1 to 10 this game deserves -1. You achieve that score by removing a point for every piece of hype, consolishness and BF:BC2 asset you see.
jumperjohn 13th October 2010, 16:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by lp1988
And here I was hoping for some huge mountain maps, missions in tunnel systems and IED's.
Try ArmA2 Operation Arrowhead. you get all this and more. A great game with modders supplying endless maps. There are even British forces!
gabe777 13th October 2010, 17:45 Quote
Crikey, you don't mince yer words do you matey ? Good on you!

I hate to think what the console versions will be like, being an UT3-engined game. Ouch ! No saving graces at all then?!

Give this a wide berth me thinks.
Bakes 13th October 2010, 18:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabe777
Crikey, you don't mince yer words do you matey ? Good on you!

I hate to think what the console versions will be like, being an UT3-engined game. Ouch ! No saving graces at all then?!

Give this a wide berth me thinks.

Since when was MoH a UT3 game? It uses Frostbite - DICE's proprietary in-house engine.
frontline 13th October 2010, 19:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bakes
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabe777
Crikey, you don't mince yer words do you matey ? Good on you!

I hate to think what the console versions will be like, being an UT3-engined game. Ouch ! No saving graces at all then?!

Give this a wide berth me thinks.

Since when was MoH a UT3 game? It uses Frostbite - DICE's proprietary in-house engine.

Single player campaign is made by 'Danger Close' on the Unreal 3 engine - multiplayer is on DICE's Frostbite engine
Kris 13th October 2010, 20:00 Quote
I see some people are very negative towards the review.

For me, I've recently noticed, I find the score itself kind of an "arbitrary" number. Meaning the experiences and impressions that Joe writes about are far more important than a simple "scoring result".

For example, if you read the bit-tech scoring guide, for me it tells that they've tried to describe a summary of a review as accurately as possible. Yet it's quite clear, that writing a 'summary' that would fit any game that is a score 6 is very difficult.

Granted, maybe the number 6 is too high - but honestly, do you even care? I don't, I got all the information I needed from the review. And those who don't bother to read it at all and just look at the number, well the review is not targeted at them anyway.

For me, Joe writes the thoughts I've had about games, and therefore I can relate to the overall "feel" of the review.

Anyway, after trying the beta, I can say that the multiplayer "had it's moments", but was overall very uninteresting.
Kris 13th October 2010, 20:01 Quote
Grr, the above comment now seems to be very 'vague', I hope everyone can understand my non-native English speaker English. :)
Ending Credits 13th October 2010, 20:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris
Grr, the above comment now seems to be very 'vague', I hope everyone can understand my non-native English speaker English. :)

Actually, on the contrary, I found it crystal clear. I also totally agree with the point you're making (personally I'm not even sure if we need a scoring system).
MrWizard 14th October 2010, 01:57 Quote
So, my buddy actually went out and paid money for this game and told me at work today: "Dude. You need to come over and play it, just to see how horrible it is."

I just got back from his place and I have to say - horrible. I managed to confirm this review along with all my own prejudices.

Another debacle from the wonderfully junk developers at EA. And as usual; don't expect any support or patches what-so-ever!
Siskodata 14th October 2010, 11:28 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Necrow
On the plus side, you will get access to Battlefield 3 beta, other than that its a linear single player and a reskin of BFBC2 multiplayer.

Yes EA scum will issue BF3 beta keys if you buy this crap. They knew MOH will be crap so they pulled this stunt. Its a shame I have bought all BF games and expansions for PC from BF1942 and I have to buy a game that doesn't even fall in the same category as BF3 so I can play the beta.

The high price is also due to the fact that EA knew they weren't going to sell MOH so to get the most money of from it they doubled the price.

BF with EA/DICE has no future I just cancelled the order for BF1943 for PC the game that will never be launched.
Siskodata 14th October 2010, 11:32 Quote
Just waiting for Home Front to come out and see how it is
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums