Medal of Honor Review

By Tom Bramwell Published 12 October, 2010

Tiers of War.

Version tested: Xbox 360

War is serious business, and if you doubt how seriously Medal of Honor developers Danger Close and DICE are taking the conflict their game portrays, consider the public explanation for the decision to change your multiplayer opponents from "Taliban" to "Opposing Force". It was taken "for the men and women serving in the military and for the families of those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice," according to executive producer Greg Goodrich, because "this franchise will never wilfully disrespect, intentionally or otherwise, your memory and service." Serious words delivered with humility, but still words from a man who at some point during the game's development sat in a meeting where someone said, "Yes, let's have a quad-bike level."

Whereas films like The Hurt Locker evade accusations of insensitivity through their dispassionate and meticulous observations of the conflicts they portray, Medal of Honor ostensibly dodges the issue by not really being about anything except what's happening on-screen. There are no politics – there's arguably a subtext about the dehumanisation of US military personnel, but the B-movie story dialogue and CG cut-scenes borrowed from 1998 do little to convince you it was deliberate – and beyond a stylish Modern Warfare-inspired introductory sequence there's relatively little to explain the context of the actions you're taking as a Navy SEAL, a US Army Ranger, a Tier 1 Operator or an Apache gunner.

Still, this tunnel-vision approach to the campaign is hardly disrespectful to the troops Danger Close so venerates. It's set at the outset of the war in Afghanistan and chronicles the efforts of soldiers fighting over the complicated terrain of Shahikot Valley, a sprawling expanse of rock, sand, dust, snow and militants. We see how the conflict begins with intelligence-gathering and surgical incisions into Taliban and Al Qaeda strongholds and outposts, before the pressure for results from Washington leads to some bad decisions, near-defeat and considerable heroics.

1

Multiplayer is arguably a bit close to Bad Company 2, but it's still difficult to put down.

As is the fashion these days, Medal of Honor is heavy on jargon, burst-firing and switches of perspective. Much of the short campaign is spent pausing behind rocks to shoot at rapidly spawning Taliban or Al Qaeda forces, tugging the left trigger to quickly iron-sight an enemy and then bursting with the right trigger to drop him. You do this in valleys and villages, on hillsides and mountain peaks, and peering through night-vision goggles in the dead of night or darkness of caves. When the next guy is down you move to the next rock. It's slick, if not exotic.

Enemies are pretty daft. These guys are supposed to have incredible knowledge of the terrain, but all they really do is hide behind rocks, helpfully popping their heads up at intervals, or run obligingly across open ground between cover points. When they're supported by gun emplacements or approach in overwhelming numbers you may find yourself tested (at least on the Hard difficulty), but generally you'll already have their number.

That's true of the US Army Ranger sections, in any event, and also for some of the SEAL and Tier 1 elements, but there is more variety to the latter, and it's also where Medal of Honor's obsession with jargon really pays off.

2

There's a reason the back of the box says "Multiplayer developed by the creators of Battlefield": DICE knows how to design maps.

We've heard soldiers inquiring about whether fire missions are danger-close for the convoy before, of course, but fittingly for a studio actually called Danger Close the developer uses military lingo more intensively, and successfully conveys the delicate balance of tension and self-control Special Forces must master to survive and prosper. "Danger close - service targets further north," your SEAL team leader barks into his radio as bombs from air support threaten to blow your squad to pieces in spectacular fashion. "Maintain noise discipline," he whispers afterwards as the dust settles.

Air support is a constant fixture and another element that heightens your sense of involvement. You're frequently invited to paint targets for incoming F-15s ("fast movers") and drones, but it's when the delicacy of that network of assets is stressed and strained that the game does its best line in high drama. There's an assault where you need to suppress a powerful enemy gun emplacement with your M249 SAW, all the while your squad-mates bravely advance to mark it with red phosphorous. Shortly afterward, you're caught out in a valley by an IED and forced to defend against waves of AK-47 and RPG-toting Taliban forces as the world falls apart around you, until you genuinely feel as though you can't save yourself.

The outstanding example of this blend of jargon and multi-faceted warfare, though, is an Apache gunfighter mission halfway through the campaign. It's an on-rails level where you mostly push buttons to fire guns at painted locations, or fire cannons and hydra missiles as your bird swoops and strafes complicated targets, but thanks to the sense of co-ordination and abstract dialogue you lose yourself in the drama of incomprehensibly deft technical warfare.

The use of the fabled Tier 1 Operators offers another welcome change of tempo and emphasis as you ghost militants on hillsides, and your partner Dusty carefully measures your assaults to increase the certainty of success while making them more efficient and economical on your supplies. The choreography at work in the Tier 1 and SEAL sections is one of Medal of Honor's greatest assets, and does a good job of articulating the difference between Special Forces and their colleagues lower down the elite scale.

It's a shame, then, that the scripting and storytelling outside the action is mixed. The CG cut-scenes are antiquated, while the story is hammy and a bit "Channel 5, 9pm" in execution. There's even a bit where one of the tech guys cuts off the feed from Langley before a General can order his CO to do something he knows is wrong. "Looks like we lost the feed, sir," he says with a grin. Feel good! That's an order! When one of your mates solemnly notes, "Man, there's a lot of bad guys here, Intel really dropped the ball," you wonder how long the writer had that one on a Post-It Note stuck to his monitor before he found an opportunity to use it.

Medal of Honor's campaign isn't a technical marvel either. Danger Close went for Unreal Engine 3 to tell the main story, and it seems ill-suited to the long draw distances and proposed detail levels, frequently diving well below the 30fps baseline and popping in textures on the console versions. Elsewhere, contextual dialogue sometimes kicks in too late because you did something too quickly for the script, and bits where dramatic things happen to you (falling down a hill, for example) make such a song and dance about wresting control away that it feels clunky. Compared to the sequence in Halo: Reach where you're pounced on by a Covenant Elite, all beautifully in-engine and rendered from your perspective, the absence of polish is jarringly anachronistic for a blockbuster game in 2010.

DICE's vaunted multiplayer, however, uses the Frostbite engine from Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and looks much better throughout. There are five game modes - team deathmatch, capture-and-hold, two asymmetrical assault set-ups (one fast, one slow) and a "Hardcore" mode where expected crutches like ammo pick-ups and regenerating health are either removed completely or heavily regulated - and it's set over eight well-designed and varied maps.

More on Medal of Honor

There are only three classes - Rifleman, Special Ops and Sniper - but they complement one another well. The Rifleman's smoke grenade clears the way for Spec Ops, for example, who in turn frightens enemies out of cover and into the sights of the Sniper. DICE rewards progress with new toys, but without giving veteran players too much of an advantage. Support Actions - directed airstrikes, for example - are well balanced following public beta-testing, while weapon customisation is a complex and rewarding experience.

It's a different approach to some of Medal of Honor's competitors, designed to put skilful players on top whatever their experience level, but the result will undoubtedly still be that if you don't get in early and sacrifice time to learning levels and systems, you will struggle to find a foothold without enduring a lot of frustration. Those who do may find the experience a little too close to Bad Company 2 for comfort, but that won't stop them enjoying the remix.

We know that multiplayer is keenly not about portraying the Afghanistan war, of course, given that the developers have said that changing the name Taliban to Opposing Force has no material impact on gameplay. This disconnect is perhaps a good thing; multiplayer runs a much greater risk of appearing insensitive given that you sprint, jump, die and respawn at a fearsome rate, and without the careful scripting of the linear campaign you can do all sorts of things that would look quite bad, in or out of context. All the same, it's hard not to feel it could and should have been completely abstracted.

As a game about the Afghanistan war that does its absolute utmost to avoid being about the Afghanistan war, Medal of Honor is arguably just a shooting gallery spliced with a fairground ride and a solid multiplayer accessory which owes a lot to Bad Company 2. It certainly does little to advance the theory that videogames are responsible enough to tell stories within sensitive contexts - it's compelling and enjoyable to play on a visceral level, but it's a shame it lacks the creative bravery to match the courage of the heroes it so reveres. Having set out to prove that there is another way of doing a first-person shooter set within a contemporary conflict, however, it can lay claim to qualified success as an interesting vertical slice of the US military machine.

8 / 10

Medal of Honor is released for PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 this Friday.

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000. Follow him on Twitter.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (166) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • cianchristopher #1 2 years ago

    Wow, unexpectedly high score. Interesting, very interesting!

  • psychokitten #2 2 years ago

    Oh dear.
    My purchase will depend on how many are playing the MP, since the SP is meant to be so so short.

  • Quint2020 #3 2 years ago

    Oh, another linear first person shooter? Be still my beating heart...

  • JBlokeUK #4 2 years ago

    Awaits Faceoff where the 360 will no doubt be the "better" version.

  • Optimaximal #5 2 years ago

    Isn't the review embargo 2pm?

  • Tallon4 #6 2 years ago

    Was kinda worried because 'everybody' saying this game is crap....well at least compared to CoD. But I was stubborn and pre-ordered it @ Zavvi.

    After this review I can get a goodnight sleep again.

    edit: Guess Dutch humour is different from English one :)
    Edited by Tallon4 at 12/10/10 @ 18:03

  • Essien #7 2 years ago

    Probably wrong to comment on a game that I wasn't going to get anyway, but..

    Surely this is one shooter too many. How many more can we take??

    Please people buy something else!

  • thepiedpiper #8 2 years ago

    i honestly find eurogamer reviews very confusing! you can read a generally derogatory review that slates the game, and then slaps an 8 at the end, like this one, and then sometimes it's the other way around!

  • metalangel #9 2 years ago

    But does it finally tell us how OUR oil got under THEIR sand?

  • Beano #10 2 years ago

    Yay... War Porn Game #629

  • beastmaster #11 2 years ago

    Interesting. I'm considering this for the MP. If it's BC2 remix then that's fine I guess. However, what interests me is the MP level design. Not much mention of the kind of maps available and what they are like to play.

  • mathare92 #12 2 years ago

    @JBloke - well it is based on UE3, so it wouldnt be much of a surprise if the 360 version pips the PS3 version.

    Anyway, two thumbs-up on the review, Tom.
    Edited by mathare92 at 12/10/10 @ 12:12

  • thedaveeyres #13 2 years ago

    Bit of a sketchy review on the multiplayer... though I suppose it's hard to judge it fairly till it's out in the wild.

  • carlitoswagon #14 2 years ago

    @metalangel

    +1

    Comments like this brighten an otherwise shite day.

  • linksdad #15 2 years ago

    "Probably wrong to comment on a game that I wasn't going to get anyway, but..

    Surely this is one shooter too many. How many more can we take??

    Please people buy something else!" No dont! buy this instead of COD, one in the eye to Booby kuntfuck.

  • mathare92 #16 2 years ago

    @Raining_Upwards - Right on time, DF's got one up now.

  • JBlokeUK #17 2 years ago

    @mathare92

    But I heard the PS3 version was the lead development platform?

  • thesonglessbird #18 2 years ago

    Bleh. Can't decide if I care or not.

  • Vin #19 2 years ago

    Review reads like a six, but managed an eight.

    I'm so confused. And it's only Tuesday!

  • itsfuzzy #20 2 years ago

    So the review is basically saying, continue playing Battlefield 2 if you still have it and save yourself 40-50 quid.

  • Sir_TimAlot #21 2 years ago

    Was gonna get it anywhere due to my unconditional love for FPS (thats rights, it's me who's buying them all)
    Doubt i will play it much this weekend though as MOH defo comes in at second place when its out the same day as Naruto UNS2!

  • MaFlippinHeadHurts #22 2 years ago

    Do you play as Zakk Wylde then?!

  • cianchristopher #23 2 years ago

    It actually sounds really bad from that review - essentially the campaign is completely throwaway (at least that's how I read it).

    And the multiplayer is a Bad Company 2 re-skin (and no doubt palmed off to the "B-team" at DICE); this really begs the question: "what on earth is this game's purpose"?

    It's the most pointless "AAA" release I can think of in recent memory. They coulda got away with it in 2008, a mere 12 months after Call of Duty 4. But 3 years later? C'mon....

    Also, given that "Danger Close" (aka EA Los Angeles) apparently spent 3 years crafting the campaign for this, isn't it more than a little disgraceful that it's another 5 hour, on rails, completely forgettable shooting gallery?

  • swissorc #24 2 years ago

    Miss Fire.

    Ps Wake me up when the Marines turn Homo.
    Edited by swissorc at 12/10/10 @ 12:20

  • kinky_mong #25 2 years ago

    There are only three classes - Rifleman, Special Ops and Sniper - but they complement one another well. The Rifleman's smoke grenade clears the way for Spec Ops, for example, who in turn frightens enemies out of cover and into the sights of the Sniper.

    Or if many games of Bad Company 2 are an example, the rifleman has to rush an objective all on his own because the rest of the team are all snipers sitting on the same hill.

    Think I'll give this a miss if it's just a slight remix of Battlefield and get the Vietnam DLC for Bad Company 2 instead.

  • Goodfella #26 2 years ago

    Yawn.

    *goes back to Castlevania*

  • syphaa #27 2 years ago

    If it's anything like BFBC2 with regards to its multiplayer then i'm sold...the campaign will just be an added bonus to blast through. Looking forward to picking it up this week. Interested to see how customisable the weapons are in MP. Nothing really outlining this anywhere...or is there?

    Was expecting a 8/10 - 9/10 so not really thrown me for or against.

  • spekkeh #28 2 years ago

    So pretty good, if wholly unnecessary?

    Given that the quazillionth release of FIFA is ranked #1 yet again, this will probably sell by the shitload.

  • Moz #29 2 years ago

    Disappointing in some respects as was hoping for a decent single player for a change given that it got it's own dedicate team. But not using Frostbite for the single player just seems plain moronic (I'm guessing DICE joined the project later then I thought which suggests the project was looking like a total car crash a year or so back)

    My order's already shipped but in 2 minds if I should just drop it into GAME for a refund or not when it arrives. Time to hit the review trail.

  • geordiek #30 2 years ago

    Damn that U3 engine. Why are people still using it?

  • Soton4084 #31 2 years ago

    Well, with Battlefield Bad Company 2: Vietnam coming out soon I really don't know if I'll be getting this as well. There doesn't seem to be much point when the review states that the MP is similar to BFBC:2. The single-player sounds poor. A disappointment for anyone who remembers the original PS1 Medal of Honour games and their immersive storylines. Maybe I'll get it once it drops in price.

  • BillyBrush #32 2 years ago

    Perhaps it's harsh because i've not played it, obviously.

    But...i get the sense this score..for this game...is part of the reason why the industry is so shallow, and full of shit. I'm going to pour one out for old Al Wake, he got called a dick yet the characters in this game are probably as deep as a paddling pool.

    Really though, if Last Guardian manages to be one of the best games of this generation and sells less copies than this....it's...erm...somehow Eurogamers fault...yea

  • Bradach #33 2 years ago

    Good review, thanks. Anyone know how long the SP campaign is on average? I'm hearing 4 hours :(

  • chrisola #34 2 years ago

    i might rent it to blast through a new campaign in a couple of sittings, then go back to Bad Co 2 on-line.

    I have to agree with the 'this game is pointless' comments --- what is the point of couple of hours of 'ok but not great' solo play followed by an 'ok but not great' BC2 alike MP which doesn't have terrain deformation, when you could just PLAY BC2 again?

    Also, lets face it: the COD brand is such an epic titan of the gaming world now that something like this does not stand a chance unless it brings something new and is amazingly fresh and brilliant on every level (see BC 2 for an example which is a geniune alternative).


    Edited by chrisola at 12/10/10 @ 12:26

  • FogHeart #35 2 years ago

    No more military jargon or shouty cliches, please. I was playing a game a few days ago when I heard the dialogue "I got your twenty!" Twenty? What direction is that? Or did he mean he'd bought me a packet of fags?

  • kobashi #36 2 years ago

    It doesnt sound that great to me to be honest. From reading the review it is not a must purchase!

    Not sure I will bother buying it on friday! Single players sounds very average!!

  • geeza2020 #37 2 years ago

    I wasn't going to buy this anyway, but this review really does make the game sound like the most middle of the road, by the numbers modern fps game released for quite some time (since MW2?). Who keeps buying this shit? Seriously, don't people realise that they have played this game before? Probably about 5 or 6 times by now just re-skinned with a different title on the box?

    Sorry EA/Danger Close; I'm out.

  • drumbaby #38 2 years ago

    The overall review was really 'piss takey' for want of a better phrase. Then an 8? Wow.

  • Ron_Justice #39 2 years ago

    Although the review states that its Battlefield BC2 remixed that's not entirely true. There is NO destructible environments in MoH, no medic and no killer cam and re-spawn comes only 5 seconds after death. All of which makes MoH, pretty much, a camping simulator.

    The best way to think about it is BC2 'lite' mixed with an attempt to match the pacing of MW.

    I'll be sticking with the originals - BC2 & MW2 - and wait for Viet Nam.

  • rojjer #40 2 years ago

    Actually, edited this message yet again - IGN's review just came out giving it a 6/10, scrubbed MOH from my list again. Their review was more in-keeping with my experience on the beta so I'll run with that one
    Edited by rojjer at 12/10/10 @ 16:15

  • Progguitarist #41 2 years ago

    If you already have BC2 then why would you be excited about the MP in this?

  • carlitoswagon #42 2 years ago

    Didn't someone say there's no destructible environments ala BC2 mp. Not much of a reskin if thats the case. Hoping someone puts me right and will get this on the cheap in a few weeks.

    Edit, answered above. Cheers. No buy.
    Edited by carlitoswagon at 12/10/10 @ 12:34

  • maxb #43 2 years ago

    still dont know if i will bother with this or not,was waiting for reviews to decide for me but with black ops only a month away and pro evo, f1 and dead rising 2 sitting at home i just dont know. actually reading this back has given me my answer,think i should stick with what ive got.

  • CaptainQuint #44 2 years ago

    Wow, an 8?!

    Once again, it read LOWER. What's wrong with EG (and Edge) lately?

  • thedaveeyres #45 2 years ago

    Reads like a Red Leicester but scores like a Tesco 'Extra Special' Stilton. Well fuck my arse and call me Trevor.

  • beastmaster #46 2 years ago

    @Progguitarist

    I remember seeing something a while back (Kabul level I think) and it looked like it had some tight, vertical areas in there. Perhaps the maps are different enough to justify a purchase?

  • Dizzy #47 2 years ago

    TBH I have had enough of "modern" shooters. It will have to be a 10/10 before I will buy another one.

  • Cronan #48 2 years ago

    Mr. Tom Bramwell sir, please tell us how you reviewed the multiplayer. The article just really lists the game modes, did you have a chance to play it over an actual Internet connection, using match-making?

  • spekkeh #49 2 years ago

    ew gross thedaveeyres, I'm not calling you Trevor!

  • sickpuppysoftware #50 2 years ago

    Sounds like a solid enough rental to me.

  • psychokitten #51 2 years ago

    Is this the first comments thread you've been in?

    There's a difference between people who hate a genre, and people who LIKE a genre but think it has become stale.

  • Beano #52 2 years ago

    @British_Brawler : We are really glad you are here with your correct and macho opinions, and setting us straight. No really.

  • Cronan #53 2 years ago

    This is definitely a rental, blast through it in a couple of early evenings, I think.

  • Goodfella #54 2 years ago

    @British_Brawler

    No, I just think the game looks shit.

  • psychokitten #55 2 years ago

    You're an angry little sort aren't you?
    You *could* just try accepting that people have differing opinions and not letting it upset you so much.

    FWIW I could play shooters till the cows come home but I agree there are a lot of throwaway games in the genre.

  • lordofthedunce #56 2 years ago

    oh dear

  • thedaveeyres #57 2 years ago

    Edit: In light of a nice bit of homophobia below, I rescind my comment. The guy's a cock. :)
    Edited by thedaveeyres at 12/10/10 @ 13:07

  • geeza2020 #58 2 years ago

    ban him

  • Skandalle #59 2 years ago

    didnt expect that!

  • Death-Jester #60 2 years ago

    @thepiedpiper
    Agree 100%!
    I don't take EG reviews seriously any more. It like they roll a 10-sided dice and give the game a score on whatever number the dice lands on.

    Also, complex weapon customisation?! How the hell do you manage to get yourself dressed in the morning if you find 3 options 'complex'?!

  • DefendoCroc #61 2 years ago

    The review did not read like an 8 at all ... starting to loose faith in EG.
    I already dumped GameSpot for this kind of crap, please dont follow in their footsteps :(

  • bodypopper #62 2 years ago

    @score whiners

    It's called having an opinion, scores and all.
    If you don't like it, start your own website with reviews you approve of (that's what the web is for). Or buy the game and find out if it's your cup of tea and if not get a refund.

    Sounds pretty average to me - at least Black Ops is more varied. Hopefully the Vietnam add-on for Battlefield isn't too far away.
    Edited by bodypopper at 12/10/10 @ 13:06

  • CaptainQuint #63 2 years ago

    Lol, what a crap response.

  • Death-Jester #64 2 years ago

    @bodypopper
    What's the point of writing reviews if nobody trusts your opinion any more?
    Also, -5 internet points for using the old "if you don't like it make your own" argument.

  • Jonny5Alive7 #65 2 years ago

    Sounds like it got an 8 because its a decent enough score for EA not to get annoyed, but low enough to tell us its not brilliant.

  • Vanmunt #66 2 years ago

    ha ha.. these threads are great when you get a raving loon..

  • bodypopper #67 2 years ago

    @Death Jester.

    Nobody? Sweeping generalisation there as everyone in the entire universe agrees
    Edited by bodypopper at 12/10/10 @ 13:11

  • disappointed #68 2 years ago

    @British_Brawler
    Most of the comments here are people saying "don't bother - stick with Battlefield 2." How does that fit with your argument?

  • thedaveeyres #69 2 years ago

    Huzzah, it's a conspiracy! Tom would comment on your accusations, I'm sure, if he weren't waiting outside Iceland for the bloke from EA to drop off the carrier bag full of tenners for the 8.

  • hollowroom #70 2 years ago

    is British_Brawler the online alias of Nick Griffin?

  • Death-Jester #71 2 years ago

    @bodypopper
    It was an exaggeration to benefit my argument. If you want to go out and poll every single person who reads online game reviews go ahead.

  • Kenshin001 #72 2 years ago

    Have this on pre-order because I was looking for an alternative to COD/MW but this doesn't sound much like a worthy alternative. Really disliked MW2's SP with it's ridiculous plot and recycled ideas from COD4 and was hoping this would be a bit grittier and have a semblance of story, something a bit more thought provoking or emotionally mature. Maybe that's too much of a contradiction in a game about war. Oh well keep my fingers crossed game devs will one day give us an Apocalypse Now or Saving Private Ryan.

  • Ron_Justice #73 2 years ago

    British_Brawler wrote:

    "The average tool on here wants any game that has you in the shoes of a US Marine shooting arabs slated to death and given a terrible score. That's what it comes down to. Not all this "oooh but it does nothing new". It's about your stupid anti-war agenda.

    You're just all mad because a game you hate hasn't been scored lower. If you hate it anyway why would it matter if it got an 8, 9 or 10? You still wont buy it. Why do you feel upset it didn't get marked down low enogh? Weirdos"

    Fuck your opinion, whatever, but who the fuck are you? You've got a post count of like 9 or something and you feel qualified to comment on 'the average tool on here' ?

    Cock.
    Edited by Ron_Justice at 12/10/10 @ 13:17

  • benfresh76 #74 2 years ago

    "As a game about the Afghanistan war that does its absolute utmost to avoid being about the Afghanistan war, Medal of Honor is arguably just a shooting gallery spliced with a fairground ride and a solid multiplayer accessory which owes a lot to Bad Company 2. It certainly does little to advance the theory that videogames are responsible enough to tell stories within sensitive contexts - it's compelling and enjoyable to play on a visceral level, but it's a shame it lacks the creative bravery to match the courage of the heroes it so reveres. Having set out to prove that there is another way of doing a first-person shooter set within a contemporary conflict, however, it can lay claim to qualified success as an interesting vertical slice of the US military machine."

    Well said.

  • hollowroom #75 2 years ago

    Getting back to the game and away from the hilarious rantings of a madman, does anyone know the multiplayer user limit? 32?

    If I buy this, it will only be for the MP.

  • Trigga_Tybalt #76 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 15:43:01 23-02-2012

  • Brownie-uk7 #77 2 years ago

    @British Brawler:
    This is my first and probably last post on EG but I just had to write ....
    hahaha! I can almost feel the rage and the spittle frothing from your mouth with every word you must have furiously typed. Pre-ordered this one did you?

    I would imagine that the majority of people reading this thread are doing so as they want to know if they should buy what has been a fairly hyped game. I love FPS and am dissapointed about the review (although not the score ... wtf?!) but it sounds like they have done nothing new and the boring stereotyped "hooorah" (America, Fuck Yeah!) soldier act is beyond wearing thin on us all.

    Regarding the score, then I have to agree. I can normally guess what the score is going to be after reading 3/4s of the article and I had this one pegged for a 7 at best. For an 8 (which normally carries some weight at EG) I would have expected at least 2 paragrpahs of possitive comment.

    Keep up the hate. It makes you strong.

  • lordofthedunce #78 2 years ago

    @British_Brawler

    there are certain morons on here

    I can certainly think of one...
    Edited by lordofthedunce at 12/10/10 @ 13:19

  • CatWeazle #79 2 years ago

    This sounds particularly yawn-worthy.

    The market is too saturated with this shit for anything but the best to be worth my time / money. The review read like a 7/10 at the best, I'm surprised this got 80%

  • Trikk #80 2 years ago

    i honestly find eurogamer reviews very confusing!

    They are based on the budget of the game. MoH has a bigger budget than most shooters, which is why it gets an 8/10, but it has a smaller budget than Halo which is why it doesn't get a 10/10.

    Having played the multiplayer "beta" I can safely say that this is garbage as far as multiplayer goes. It's a stripped-down BFBC2 without vehicles and as everyone knows that's the only reason to play BFBC2 over similar FPS like CS or even MW2. The engine is horrible in infantry combat and the servers run at about 10 tick rate which means you kill your enemy at the same time as he kills you every single life.

  • bradley-strider #81 2 years ago

    Another 0815-Shooter... no thanks. Tired of this kind of shooter...

  • jonsaan #82 2 years ago

    'a bit "Channel 5, 9pm" in execution'

    Entertaining you mean?

  • Sausagechaos #83 2 years ago

    As part of the US Military Machine, will blowing up hostages be an option?

    .........too soon?

  • kinky_mong #84 2 years ago

    I going to go ahead and say I think British_Brawler is SAS_Sniper back again. Instead of arguing about games shouldn't you be getting excited about heading off to shoot some "towel-heads" while constantly checking over your shoulder for incoming American bullets?

  • chessboxer #85 2 years ago

    @hollowroom

    The PC version supports up to 24 players, so it will be the same or fewer supported on the PS3/360.

  • hollowroom #86 2 years ago

    @chessboxer.

    Thanks. A bit disappointed about that, but ho hum.

  • DrizztP #87 2 years ago

    Can you maybe highlight how you gave this an 8?
    That seemed very negative.

  • Ron_Justice #88 2 years ago

    British_Brawler wrote:

    "Bwahahahahha @ Rom_Justice. Sorry I guess unless you have a high enough post count you aren't allowed to speak.

    FUCK YOU AND YOUR POST COUNT YOU STUPID FAGGOT!"

    :D Touched a nerve much? You write things like "The average tool on here" and "there are certain morons on here" implying you're familiar with the the posters / community and their opinions and yet you've only ever "spoken" 9 times. That doesn't appear to be informed. You're just coming off as an annoying prick that likes to shout but not really contribute any thing worthwhile.

    Feel free, speak up, just don't attack a community unless you can illustrate an involvement and history of rational discussion with said community. Maybe then your opinions wouldn't seem so retarded.

  • Rodster #89 2 years ago

    Review reads like a 5/10. I'm bored with shooters. Off to spend me money on Sonic 4 which got a 9/10. :-D

  • Zapatero #90 2 years ago

    Playing as an "OpFor" suicide bomber would be interesting. As would a rescue mission where you end up blowing the hostages to bits instead of the enemy.

  • dmcclure #91 2 years ago

    I really like FPS games and have played the recent Multiplayer Beta for this. I would advise anyone that buys it to keep the receipt, as you will most probably want to return the game to the shop after a few hours.

  • kangarootoo #92 2 years ago

    @British_Brawler

    You sir are an angry bigot with a short fuse.



    Where is a mod when you need one?

  • jefranklin18 #93 2 years ago

    "Would you rather play as a taliban suicide bomber or something"

    That would be a very short game although there could be a mini-game at the end where you get to play with 13 virgins :)

  • natashaspice #94 2 years ago

    Didn't they say moh frontline was gonna come bundled with this on the ps3.

  • RedPanda #95 2 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • Gambit1977 #96 2 years ago

    That'll do me :)

  • beastmaster #97 2 years ago

    @redpanda

    [link url=http://www.planetxbox360.com/article_11936/Medal_of_Honor
    ]http://www.planetxbox360.com/article_119...[/link]

    It seems as though they've made it more COD. Smaller, no destruction but a lot faster pace (this is the MP).

  • BabyJesus #98 2 years ago

    There is always one comedy meltdown for every major releases review's comments.

    Love it.

  • Moonprince #99 2 years ago

    So from that review: AI is dumb, game looks like shit, story is a mess. Score: 8.

    So what am I missing

  • andywilkie35 #100 2 years ago

    Sounds like a festering turd, think I'll avoid this, just sounds like Modern Snorefare 3 or something. SHOOTY BANG BANG!

  • Dave52 #101 2 years ago

    A very confusing read. Bad review - great score...

    And the MP hardly got a mention. Why...? The main thrust of these games is the MP, that's why the campaigns are so short. I'm gonna get it anyway as I am FPS mad and I love what Dice did with BFBC2.

  • monkeywithnoeyes #102 2 years ago

    really does read like an 8/10 review

  • RevanNL #103 2 years ago

    I was kinda expecting a usual EG review, the same article but with a 4/10 or something at the end.

  • Bagpuss #104 2 years ago

    lol...i've only bought this to get acsess to the now, legendary,mythical, MIA, Battlefield 3 Beta....

    TBH....i doubt i'll even be bothered to install this....

    MOH = Been there, done that..etc,etc.

    BF3 better be fucking good....
    Edited by Bagpuss at 12/10/10 @ 14:48

  • RevanNL #105 2 years ago

    That's EA's new policy it seems: pack in a downloadcode of game that everyone wants to play with a game that no one wants to play.

  • gav082 #106 2 years ago

    @JBlokeUK

    "But I heard the PS3 version was the lead development platform"

    The PS3 is always the lead development platform on any mulitformat game. This is because it is the hardest platform to develop for, and if you can get your game to run properly on the PS3, its very easy to then move it to the 360, as apose to the other way around.

  • Markitron #107 2 years ago

    I like a good FPS, and this one was on my 'maybe' list. If you would have told me yesterday it was getting an 8 I would have bought it on Friday, but the review content does not reflect an 8 so im gonna pass. In contrast, the IGN review is in agreement with a lot of the points in this review but only scored it a 6.................

  • OllyJ #108 2 years ago

    nowt about the audio???

  • Markitron #109 2 years ago

    @OllyJ

    Just watched the gametrailers review (gave it an 8.1), apparently the music and sound is fantastic and one of the best things about the game.

  • Fightclubber #110 2 years ago

    Halo reach is getting the used trade in bin for this. I dont expect much but i love beards and i also love guns that dont feel like some shit i bought from Toys R Us

  • sanctusmortis #111 2 years ago

    Confused. Both Giant Bomb (3/5) and IGN (6/10) complained about a ton of bugs, both with scripting and graphics. This review seems positively glowing in comparison. It doesn't even mention how, thanks to the separate engines, each part is utterly different in its actions, with single player having slide to cover and such and multiplayer lacking it.

  • FuzzyDuck #112 2 years ago

    BF:BC 2 Vietnam it is for me i'm afraid.

  • TheLittlestHobo #113 2 years ago

    Great MOH quick look on giantbomb that should answer any questions anyone has.

  • KonanTheLibrarian #114 2 years ago

    Hmmmm an 8? I think someones frightened of not being invited to EA LA for the odd jolly!

    Bend over Trevor!

    Fightclubber...I hope you'll be happy with the beards.
    Edited by KonanTheLibrarian at 12/10/10 @ 16:44

  • Dave52 #115 2 years ago

    These reviews all seem to be on Xbox... Could that be the reason for the negativity...? Perhaps it's a better experience on the PS3 (just throwing the idea out there).

  • arcam #116 2 years ago

    I need to find a website that can see more than one point's difference between this and Portal.

    I know that sounds churlish, but there must be other games reviewers that agree with me about the chasm of quality between two games like that.

  • Phantom_Dynamite #117 2 years ago

    I don't think I will be getting this maybe when its cheaper, it seems like development was rushed to ensure it beats Black OPs out the gate so people will buy it just to tied them over til November.

    Im looking forward to BO just because its not modern or WW2, thats a lie I miss WW2 a little, would love a Vietnam setting.

    Guess Bad Company Nam will have to do more excited for an expansion than MoH which is a shame as I have enjoyed the series.

  • RevanNL #118 2 years ago

    @Dave52: Yes, because the campaign magically becomes longer on the PS3, the scripting is better and EA's servers suddenly don't suck.

  • Dave52 #119 2 years ago

    Lol @ RevanNL... Nerve touched...? :)

  • JayKwon #120 2 years ago

    Wow this review does not read like an 8. I have nothing against the score, but at least explain why it is an eight then.

    Imo there are way to many shooters, and I only buy the best or actually the most original best. Judging by this review and my personal taste I can say MoH does not belong with the, imo, original best.
    Edited by JayKwon at 12/10/10 @ 18:47

  • lockload #121 2 years ago

    Ive heard the campaign is 4 hours is this true?

  • Drool #122 2 years ago

    Whoops, above the metascore atm, better re-review it guys.

  • costa_k #123 2 years ago

    The multiplayer is nowhere near as good as Bad Company's,and I bet as soon as Black Ops is out no one will be playing this.

  • SlapLaB #124 2 years ago

    It's a shame, really.
    How can game publishers/developers not realise that there is a large market for "mature" games which tell a story and back it up with interesting gameplay?
    Instead they re-hash yet another checkpointed FPS for pre-adolescents, with some pretension of being a real depiction of war...
    At least BC2 wasn't taking itself too seriously...
    ...
    Oh well, I still haven't finished Demon's Souls...

  • JohnnySixShooter #125 2 years ago

    Oh well, I be getting Fallout Las Vegas and GT5 instead, no worries!

  • addyb #126 2 years ago

    I'm keeping my pre order. Played the pc beta and enjoyed it for what it was. I can't compare it with BC2 as I've never played it and yes I get the impression the lack of maps per game mode will mean this gets old real fast. However for me it's purely a stop gap until black ops gets here. I've nothing to play at the moment bar fifa11 and I'm a sucker for the fps genre so think I will enjoy this even if it's only for a month.

    Cod and BC have become the fifa and pro evo of online shooters and can't see there being any room for a 3rd. If there is it would have to be something special and at the moment any devs would find that an uphill task without trying to rip off the current titans.
    Edited by addyb at 12/10/10 @ 21:10

  • makeamazing #127 2 years ago

    I was enjoying it, but this game needs serious polish, there are some pretty obvious problems, invisible walls and scripted events not being run, meaning you cannot continue (some people may not have that particular bug, but for me unfortunately so)... The story needs a little more work, its nearly as confusing as MW2... guns feel good.

    But with the issues that i have already faced in the first 1 hour of playing, I cannot see me wanting to pay full price for this at the moment... it needed more time, but i guess they wanted it released before Black Ops. This could damage the future of the MH series going forward, especially if the 4 hour SP campaign is true (which is a shame if it is, what happened to 8 hour + SP games :(

    Anyway, i hope they fix some of these issues. I have not played the multiplayer. 6/10 for me so far :(

  • EmiliasHorse #128 2 years ago

    I thought EA were going to throw the kitchen sink at this to make a COD beater.... I got fed up of this type of shooter long before MW2 and from the looks of things MOH is not going to tempt me back.

  • GitSomE_UK #129 2 years ago

    Hmmm disappointed with this, 4 hour campaign, half a job by DICE... one for the bargain bin me thinks.

    Sticking with trusty BFBC2.

    I was hoping I would finally get the BF2 experience I enjoyed so much on PC back for the console.

    /Cancels Pre-Order

  • Dashnak #130 2 years ago

    So going by Eurogamer scores, it's as good as the PC version of Dragon Age Origins and it's better than Mafia 2...
    Which probably makes it an amazing game, yet the other reviews I've been reading suggest it would be on par with mafia 2 and inferior to dragon age orgins.

    (not that you can really compare objectively, but I'm just pointing out that eurogamer scores rarely seem to correspond that well with the tone of the review itself, although i still like reading them)

  • Emmit_Assassin #131 2 years ago

    Why didn't they just write - 'A poor mans BF:BC2' and be done with it?

  • JensonJet #132 2 years ago

    In some respects the reviewer seems overly harsh on the game. Some of the complaints actually sounded like good things to me. I guess if you wanted single player to allow you to go Rambo, as most shooters do, then this isn't the game for you.

    I sounds like the reviewer was bored with moving from cover spot to the nex,t and using suppressive fire. This actually sounds like it would allow tatics more so than other games of this genre. It's a shame the single player is short, but what's unforgiveable is the lack of co-op campaign. Without this, the game is only worth renting for me. Don't care for online camping multiplayer.

  • DarknRahl #133 2 years ago

    The word around the traps is the big publishers won't give review sites such as eurogamer first day release copies of games if they score them less than 6-7. This might explain why big budget games from big publishers always, always at least get a 7. However Medal of Honour must be pretty damn woeful as when you look at all other review sites it is getting 6's although the actual writing about the game is fairly similar.
    This would normally be a 4-5 on eurogamer. It is an average game that treads no new ground whatsoever, has poor ai, graphics that aren't up to standard for a game of this budget, ridiculously short single player, scripting and graphical bugs and a multiplayer mode that offers nothing new over games that have been released years earlier. This is a bulk standard on rails FPS experience we have seen endlessly for the past 7-8 years.
    It just means you have to read the actual reviews these days and not pay so much attention to the almighty score at the end.

  • dacicus #134 2 years ago

    Can we spell MOH: Airborne (the only MOH game that needed a patch that would almost occupy a single player DVD)?

    And don't rush on COD BlackOps either. Treyarch it's not known for fabulous games. World at War was scripte up to hell in the SP campaign, only some aspects of the MP saving the game from complete disaster. And if you look around, the original MW and BF:BC2 are still way over MW2 and World at War in terms of both SP and MP. Let's add the fact that COD: Black Ops will have dedicated servers, but you will have to pay a monthly fee for those.

    MOH MP has a chance to get better if EA supports it properly. Treyarch will dance as Activision wants. If DICE gets involved in improving MOH MP, the MP might turn okay.

  • Daggzuk #135 2 years ago

    Pre-ordered this the moment I found out that DICE was incharge of the MP. I find BC2 so much more varied than COD and I find it far less frustrating. DICE know what they are doing and the Battlefield brand is one of the best out there right back from 1942 on the PC years ago. If the MP on this is half as good as BC2 then i'll be happy. At the end of the day, Single player campaigns are there to give you a bit of cinematic drama. MW2's was over the top and totally unrealistic, but was as always fun. What annoys me is when people put MW2 on a pedastal as the best Modern FPS out there when it is just a matter of opinion, I enjoy playing the game but the Multiplayer reminds me too much of counter strike with small maps and full of foul mouthed teenagers. This is why MOH appeals to me, I will get an engine online that I know well and know will make a solid game. With a toss up of playing BLack ops or this it will have to be this everytime. The MP might be very similar to BC2 but for me that is a dream come true. DICE know how to make online shooters enjoyable and this one will be as good as the rest!

  • Foshiznik #136 2 years ago

    I have to say, the MOH review doesn't really offer much detail, other than to tell me that it isn't COD.

    I am also bored with all the MW2 obsessed readers, who will dismiss any game that threatens to spoil the COD party. I personally will take the games as single entities, as they should be looked at.

    I have both BFBC2 and MW2, and personally, i find BFBC2 more varied, playable and just overall better equiped for multiplayer gameplay. MW2's SP was so much better though.

    I am not bothered by the single player. As someone earlier said, it is just for cinematic effect. What i am more intrigued by is whether DICE have created an MP worthy of the £££s.

    if it is anything like BFBC2, then i would say it was.

  • sir_smooch #137 2 years ago

    ive had this pre ordered for a while along with the new cod after being a little let down by mw2. That said though i love the look of the mp maps. my problem with the cod games (especially mw2) were that the maps felt just like maps in a game rather than a recreation of a small part of a real life battlefield plus the more you seemed to play them the smaller they seemed to feel whereby you was constantly bumping into the person you just killed or vice versa. All i can say is i can't wait for friday!

  • Foshiznik #138 2 years ago

    lol @ dacicus.

    If Treyarch made the Modern Warfare COD and Affinity Ward made the WW2 ones, you would be saying the opposite. Treyarch make games just as well, there is just more scope available for modern warfighting.

  • Harmonica #139 2 years ago

    ^ You might take a history lesson regarding the Call of Duty series. Namely 'Call of Duty 2' which is the best game to bear the title, set in WWII, and made by IW.

    --

    This review is clearly underwritten on the multiplayer side of things. Too much effort to set up a system link game with some people in order to get some detailed impressions of it? Most people will finish the campaign in a day or two and then take things online. Have no idea whether this is worth getting for the online or not.
    Edited by Harmonica at 13/10/10 @ 13:34

  • Foshiznik #140 2 years ago

    ^^ Obviously i meant next gen COD.

    My point still stands. If Treyarch made MW2, people would be slating IW for making the WW2 ones.

  • Daggzuk #141 2 years ago

    DICE are involved with the online and bar the barmy idea of battlefield 2142 they have never slipped up. The online will be v good. DICE are by far the best in the field of online fps designers. They wont disapoint!

  • Stuart78 #142 2 years ago

    Im not that Bothered about thye single player (Yes ill play it and complete it) but its the online gameplay that is all im interested in. can't we have a seperate review just for that.. i hear its 2 diferent makers, 1 for single player and 1 for online so both should be reviewed on their own.

  • GitSomE_UK #143 2 years ago

    @Dagzuk

    Woah, Woah Woah! BF2142 Barmy?

    BF 2142 was a great attempt at switching the BF universe to something new. Disarming the shields of the mother ship prior to storming it and overloading the cores was great and for the time very original. Mobile turrets, mechs and so on all in the BF vein. I had a great deal of fun flying a drop ship from a base to a hovering mothership, waiting for the squad to overload the core, they run back to your waiting ship with the countdown to detonation running and fly off. If it was timed right you all watched the mother ship blow as the drops ship flew away.

    That and many more moments gave me and I'm sure many other action sci-fi fans a proper chub on. BF2142 was way ahead of its time.

    I applaud dice for having the balls to break away from the norm with BF2142 and try something new. IMO from what I've seen so far MOH is a step backwards for them.

  • Daggzuk #144 2 years ago

    Agreed its good to break away from the norm but it just seemed to be a reworked version of battlefield 2. I like sci fi but never got on with it. Still think its barmy but just my opinion...Oh and nothing will ever beat bf1942. Still brilliant now!
    Edited by Daggzuk at 13/10/10 @ 14:51

  • Foshiznik #145 2 years ago

    ^^

    ...Except for BFBC2 ;-)

  • Daggzuk #146 2 years ago

    @foshiznik

    There close my son....very close!

  • Al_Swearengen #147 2 years ago

    Disappointing but not unexpected. I had planned to wait this one out as Fallout will conquer everything in my house until Xmas just as Fallout 3 did previously. I had planned to pick this up towards the end of the year so let's see if time truly can heal all wounds.

  • TRUTH #148 2 years ago

    COD is the most overrated games...I liked COD 2, 3..then just got boring.

  • govaner7 #149 2 years ago

    read that last paragraph thats an 8? seems like it feels like a 6, this site is no more than a news site, its good at that, as for their reviews they have no credibility.

  • FutureDave #150 2 years ago

    /reads review
    Oh dear...

    /sees score
    Huh?

  • rojjer #151 2 years ago

    its good that everyone likes different games, I for one think that Dead Rising 2 is bollox. Not tried MOH yet, but I might pick it up as a stop-gap before COD comes out. Hoping EA 'Pull a Lynch' and drop the price to keep it near the top spot..

  • Codger81 #152 2 years ago

    Turrets, turrets, turrets - disguised or nots, it's all turrets.

  • peppergomez #153 2 years ago

    So the comments section is more a review of the review than players' thoughts/own review of the actual game? Weird.

  • addyb #154 2 years ago

    Got the game today and played about 2 hours online and didn't like it. Played a few more hours tonight and all of a sudden I'm getting into it now and I'm really enjoying it. I guess I've played mw2 too much as I took the guns blazing approach and got my ass handed to me. I put on my old counter strike skills hat and I'm doing ok now. My only complaint is the lack of maps. The actual gameplay is good, handles well, good audio and overall atmosphere and the scorechains are a nice touch even tho they have ripped the idea from cods killstreaks.

    Before I got the game I heard reports of it being sniper heaven and bad respawning but I haven't encountered any in about 6 hrs worth of play so far.

    Lastability wise I don't know. Lack of maps could be the killer for me but after initially being underwhelmed I've clocked a good 6 hrs in and I'm enjoying it.

  • Stuart78 #155 2 years ago

    @addyb
    Nice comments about the game, ive been looking through trying to spot if anyone has played this and although you sound like you don't like more than Cod you do enjoy it for the game it is. Ireally stuck if to get this or not, before the reviews it looked like the game i wished BFBC2 was but now im not too sure.... As long as its a little bit better than BC2 (online) and it sort of looks as good as MW2 then it should make a desent game.
    a good tip.. if like me you can't deside, Gamestation 10 day returns is a very handy offer.... ill see how it goes for a week if its poo i'll get Fallout next friday.

  • CHACK #156 2 years ago

    chances are that EA will probably release new content on or around the same day that COD hits, who knows, while I love the MOH franchise its quite apparent that the game doesn't innovate enough, as for people saying MW2 is dull you guys are hardcore cynics through and through, it has flaws certainly but its not dull but in saying that - so far neither MOH or MW2 or BFBC2 have repeated the incredible tension an immersion into a story led single player campaign that Infinity Ward delivered with the Sniper mission from Modern Warfare.

    MOH hasn't delivered enough diversity, options or innovative design to stand out, it'll smash 3 million units but the team has its work to do for MOH2

  • t8yman #157 2 years ago

    how this got 8/10 is a mystery to me. its utter garbage. neg all you like, but I havent played anything this poorly finished for a long time. on rails, terrible voice acting, white gaps in eyes and mouths, and the dimmest AI I have come across for a long long time.

  • addyb #158 2 years ago

    @stuart78

    This game certainly requires a few hours bedding in period. If you have played a lot of cod then I would guess you will instantly dislike this. I was the same after a couple of hours. The more I play the more I enjoy it. I think all the negative reviews/comments about the multiplayer come from people that have just played it for an hour or so. I was exactly the same. It initially lacks the fun factor due to how hard it can be, but once you start to learn the maps and don't go all cod style legging it into open spaces it becomes quite a unique experience. It still feels like it's lacking something and does feel barebones compared to cod, lack of maps, weapons etc but i find it very atmospheric.

    IMO if EA made the snipers less godly, added more maps and patched the lobbies adding a couple of features like comms, team lists, vote to skip system like they have in cod and other shooters they would be onto a winner. As it stands I don't think it's a replacement for Cod or bc2 but it's a good alternative if for some reason your bored or don't like those games.
    Edited by addyb at 15/10/10 @ 17:50

  • Stuart78 #159 2 years ago

    been playing online now for about an hour or so and yes your right, its very hardcore for those thats used to MW2 Infact i hated the last half hour of my experiance due to continuly getting killed (for some reason i really missed a kill cam cause sometimes i just couldn't belive where i was getting shot from)
    Like you say i may need to adjust from MW gaming, but its pretty tricky as when i took the slower aproach i was killed many times by campers and snipers.
    Good job Gamestation offer a 10 return thats all i can say about the game.

  • bwiancohen #160 2 years ago

    Single player is pretty lacking but as for multiplayer...... Im loving it :)

  • Stuart78 #161 2 years ago

    ^^^ really?
    im the other way around, just completed single player (about 3-4 hours which is soooo short for a £40 game) even did it on Hard and i was shocked how easly you can stroll through it. Ill spend abit of time on line now, but after 2 hours i can tell you its bloody annoying.

  • Talbot #162 2 years ago

    What were they thinking with this? Yeah we will be able to win back our share of the market by basically copying MW2 and then making it less good. I also cannot stand those cheesy overlay texts; a pathetic attempt at constructing the mood and highly unoriginal.

    Clearly that 8/10 score has been buffed by a couple of golden handshakes.

    *Spit*

  • andromeda #163 2 years ago

    its very good after a smoke on some decent thai weed and a glug of red wine.
    You kind of get the satisfaction of gawping at a film ( nota great one mind you ) and then suddenly get given a
    MASSIVE GUN but cant stop staring at the nice mist effects and generally great graphics and lighting.
    Operation Wolf from the future says HI

  • sjmlondon #164 2 years ago

    Agree with the majority of people on here.
    The single player campaign is remarkably short, not very varied and easy even on hard. Duck shooting all the way. I did like the helicopter bit though.

    The real disappointment given that DICE (BFBC2) were behind it, though is the multiplayer which is a poor mix Modern Warfare and BFBC2 and I mean poor. Most of the maps are like playing Rust from MW2 when it was being glitched and everyone had unlimited everything. Playing area too small with too many players on each map. Spawn killers and campers everywhere or players funnelled into narrow passageways on route to objective resulting in the inevitable turkey shoot from defending team. Soul destroying. Only 3 classes and limited choice of weapons and just the slow grind of ranking up.

    I suppose you could call it the Tesco Value Version of BFBC2.


    When you go back to BFBC2 afterwards you appreciate how good the multiplayer is and how much polish has gone into it.

  • Mashum #165 1 year ago

    No southpaw - what a waste of an admittedly discounted £25 (new). Fuck, fuck fuck fuck.. and also fuck.

    I see the fine people at Dice have a southpaw option in their multiplayer section, but none from Danger Close in the campaign. I guess I'll have a crack at stumbling though it like this.


    edit: from the hour and a bit I've spent with it's nothing worth temporarily rewiring my brain for anyway, to the trade in counter.
    Edited by Mashum at 21/12/10 @ 21:18

  • eiocreative #166 1 year ago

    I don't get some comments. I thought this game was miles better than any of the recent COD's. UE3 creates the atmosphere of dust, explosions, and bullets kicking up etc brilliantly. When you pull the trigger you want it to affect the surroundings and it does so fantastically, it’s that feel I really enjoy. The lighting and vistas are also superb. I’ve loved every second of it!

    Please make another!