Medal Of Honor: Frontline Review

By Gestalt Published 23 June, 2002

Review - Medal of Honor goes back to its console roots, and what a homecoming it is!

Version tested: PlayStation 2

The Great Crusade

jan06b

Where's Jurgen Prochnow when you need him?

When Medal Of Honor : Allied Assault was launched with a party at the Imperial War Museum in London back in February, most of the attendant journalists were slouched over a PC running the game, or camping the bar. I was too busy playing the single level demo of Frontline which was running on a debug PS2 hidden around the back of a V2 rocket to bother with such petty distractions.

Four months later Frontline has finally reached the shelves, and once again it has had me glued to a joypad. From the moment the game starts up it's obvious that this is the game Allied Assault should have been, sporting a more consistent single player campaign and an extra coat of polish. An introductory cinematic sets the scene perfectly, with an actor reading out Eisenhower's famous letter to the troops on the eve of D-Day against a backdrop of historical war footage.

And then it's straight in at the deep end. Literally, as Frontline does away with all that nonsense in North Africa and opens up with an all-out assault on the beaches of Normandy. Before you have a chance to fully appreciate the beautiful graphics, the shells detonating around you and the German fighters strafing the landing craft, an explosion sinks your boat and hurls you and your squad into the water, leaving the survivors to swim ashore. When you reach dry land the beach looks virtually identical to the equivalent level in Allied Assault, but this is far more than a simple port. The mission objectives and gameplay have been revamped to better suit the console and its audience, and to give the game a more human touch. For example, your charge up the beach is mostly spent giving covering fire for your scattered squad mates, helping everyone to reach the safety of the dunes before blasting a hole in the wall and scrambling through.

The Tide Has Turned

may11b

Maybe this wasn't a good idea...

The whole experience is also far less frustrating than it was on the PC, where a single wrong step could place you in the path of a pre-scripted mortar shell, leading to instant death. In Frontline your soldier is made of sterner stuff, and you're far less likely to die before reaching the dunes, even though you're running around between shell holes and iron posts trying to save your allies.

Normally this would make the game more of a run-and-gun shooter, but this being a console title there is no quick save button. Indeed, the only time you can save is at the end of a mission, and as most of them can take upwards of half an hour to complete, you're encouraged to be cautious. While this might upset some people, the sheer tension it creates is so intense that your hands would be shaking by the end of a level even if it wasn't for the fact that the controller vibrates eerily when your character is near death. Before long you're creeping through the streets, ducking behind cover at every sound and peeking out from around corners to check for guards.

This is made possible by Frontline's "aim" function. With most weapons, holding down the L1 trigger zooms in your view of the action ever-so-slightly, as if you were squinting down the barrel of the gun to get a better look at your target. While the trigger is held, the left stick of your Dual Shock allows you to bob your head around without shifting your feet. Move the stick left and you lean left. Move it down and you crouch. Move it up and to the right and your character pops up and leans out to the right. With a little practice you can control your movement with almost pixel-perfect accuracy to make the most of any cover you've managed to find.

Well Equipped And Battle-Hardened

may16b

A Bridge Too Far?

It's not just your own character who makes use of cover in this way either. Open fire and any enemy soldiers in the area will scatter and dash for cover, hiding around corners or crouching behind any convenient crates, cars, ruined walls or concrete road blocks they can find. Soon both sides are ducking out to pop off a few shots and then pulling themselves back out of the way as the enemy returns fire.

The animators have done a great job as well, with the wide range of movements available to your enemies as they desperately try to avoid being shot a beauty to behold. Soldiers peek out from around corners, lie prone on the ground, and hold their weapons above their heads to spray random gunfire across a street without presenting an easy target. Get too close for comfort and they'll try to batter you with the butt of their rifle. The result is surprisingly life-like, and helps to make combat feel far more immersive.

This is backed up by a variety of gore-free pain and death animations. Roof-top snipers clutch their chests before tumbling over the edge and falling into the street, while if you shoot a soldier in the foot he hops around in agony for a few seconds before recovering his composure. Even the environment reacts to your shots. In one mission you find yourself sneaking aboard a U-boat, which is modelled in painstakingly claustrophobic detail. During a firefight in the submarine's kitchen, I was delighted to see that stray shots were causing the pans hanging above the table I was sheltering behind to swing backwards and forwards.

Your Task Will Not Be An Easy One

may01b

Life amongst the ruins

While Allied Assault had a rather hit-and-miss selection of missions which dragged on longer than they needed to, Frontline is a far more finely honed beast. Having started with a bang in Normandy, the game soon has you sabotaging U-boats, fighting your way across the bridge at Nijmegen and battling it out in the streets of Arnhem at the height of Operation Market Garden. Level design is a little linear, but utterly involving and a treat for the eyes. From the ruined buildings and rubble-strewn streets of Arnhem to the U-boat pens of France and haystack-dotted Dutch fields, the game maintains a high standard throughout, and there's little evidence of the unnecessary padding which blighted Allied Assault.

Balancing is near perfect as well, and although the levels are often challenging, if you're careful you can get through most of them on the first attempt, even if your health meter is in the red by the time you reach the exit. A couple perhaps landed just on the wrong side of the dividing line between challenge and frustration, and some kind of checkpoint system might have been helpful on the longer missions to save you the pain of dying at the last hurdle and having to go right back to the start, but overall the game's a lot of fun and the lack of a proper save mechanism usually adds to the atmosphere rather than driving you away. And if you're having difficulty finding one of the mission objectives, the inclusion of an in-game help system is a god send. Press the Select button and you get a helpful suggestion from HQ, which can vary from a vague hint to the exact location of the item you missed.

Even if you do make it to the end of a level first time, you might want to go back and try again. Medals are awarded based on what percentage of the Germans you managed to kill and how much health you had left at the end, and as you earn more medals extra features are unlocked. These bonuses are available from the main menu, and include behind-the-scenes footage varying from wireframe views of the level you've just completed to video clips of the recording session for the game's soundtrack. Which, by the way, is excellent.

Conclusions

Frontline is without doubt the best first person shooter I've played on any platform in the last few years, and arguably the best console shooter of recent times. A mixture of addictive gameplay, a tense atmosphere, the ever-popular World War II setting, gorgeous graphics and solid Dolby Surround audio adds up to a compelling experience. If you loved Saving Private Ryan, A Bridge Too Far or Band Of Brothers and fancy liberating Europe for yourself, this is the game you've been waiting for. Genius.

10 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Gestalt.

About Gestalt

Read more articles from Gestalt by visiting the Gestalt archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (74) Latest comment 7 years ago

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

  • beep #1 10 years ago

    I wouldn't say it looks shite, lower resolution yes, but definitely not shite.

    My only criticism is less to do with the game and moreso with that dang dualshock controller!!! Curse it to hell!!!

  • landore #2 10 years ago

    Played it, loved it, it rocks

  • Max Diablos #3 10 years ago

    an explosion sinks your boat and hurls you and your squad into the water, leaving the survivors to swim ashore.

    Swim? With one hundred pounds of kit? At my age?

    Shurely, shome, mishtake.

  • Nemesis #4 10 years ago

    Tch, and Halo only got 8.

    *ahem*

  • Gestalt #5 10 years ago

    "Shame it looks shite on the PS2 compared to the PC version"

    Suit yourself - I prefer the way the PS2 version looks TBH. That could just be the difference between playing on a nice big widescreen TV from half way across the room and playing with my nose up against a 19" monitor though. :)

    As for the controls, they're not as precise as with a mouse and keyboard, but it's still very easy to play the game. The controls don't get in the way, and the addition of the aim function actually makes Frontline more flexible than Allied Assault.

  • skalmanxl #6 10 years ago

    From what I've seen, this looks almost exactly as good as AA...maybe lacking a bit in the texture department...but nothing major.

  • DocX #7 10 years ago

    Yep it's a damn good game - loved it! 10/10 is a bit high imho as it isn't perfect. Occasionally some of the mission objectives are a little too vague - you can get killed after, as far as the player is concerned, the mission should have finished, due to some imprecise timing. Very annoying to hack through a whole mission, complete all objectives & then step outside a door & get wacked.
    Edited by DocX at 23/06/02 @ 14:03

  • caligari #8 10 years ago

    I've snagged myself on pieces of scenery quite a few times, which is a bit of a git due to you having to restart.

    Apart from that, it's funky. Although it's a pity that some of the missions are a little bland e.g the submarine and train levels.

    And please, don't let us get started on the control system. Sit down with it for a while and you'll have it "sorted". Whinge whinge whinge...

  • DocX #9 10 years ago

    "And please, don't let us get started on the control system."

    By the time you are through the first couple of missions, you get to grips with it no problem. Just takes a bit of concentration at first - some people just can't make the effort I guess.

  • Gestalt #10 10 years ago

    "10/10 is a bit high imho as it isn't perfect"

    /me clobbers DocX with the business end of a Panzerschreck. A game doesn't have to be perfect to get 10/10, just bloody good. Which this is. I didn't have any problems with mission endings, though I did notice some of them seemed to take a few seconds to register that you'd finished. As for some of the objectives not being clear, that's where the "HQ" hint button comes in handy. I used it a couple of times, and it saved me using a walkthrough.


    "some of the missions are a little bland e.g the submarine and train levels"

    Hm, I really enjoyed the submarine level and thought the design was really good. Looked beautiful, and got just the right level of claustrophobia without being a pain to navigate.

  • Human Taco #11 10 years ago

    EA PS2 game getting 10/10? must be good... *bought*

  • DocX #12 10 years ago

    "/me clobbers DocX with the business end of a Panzerschreck."

    You'll have to get past my Panzerfaust first! Yeah, don't even know why I bought up the score in the first place - it is a bloody good game after all & there's no point arguing over numbers.

  • Viktor #13 10 years ago


    I was surprised. In opinion the game suffers from a VERY acute tube-syndrome, e.g. the player is funneled through very narrow levels and the objectives get completed nearly automatically, there is no way not to get all of them. The sense of linearity and the overwhelming scripting make this game feel like a Hollywood summer holiday blockbuster.

  • Gestalt #14 10 years ago

    Because they're so much damn fun, the games are more polished, and they generally work first time out of the box without having to patch them or upgrade your drivers? :)

  • Human Taco #15 10 years ago

    :D

  • Nobby #16 10 years ago

    Conman, why am I not shocked that the climax of your post was praising Halo?

  • mouse Verified Graphic designer, Eurogamer Network #17 10 years ago

    "You're saying this is a perfect game..."

    Right John, I'll get the pliars and the blowtorch, you hold him down.

  • skalmanxl #18 10 years ago

    10/10 isn't a perfect game! When are idiots going to realize that!
    Edited by skalmanxl at 24/06/02 @ 00:22

  • Umbala #19 10 years ago

    This could take up the place in between Project IGI and Serious Sam 2 ;) - hehe. This seeming to be a good mix of the two. The first level (Rough Landing, can't remember for sure) is the first level that actually has pulled me into the game. I thought when you come from the boat to the beach: "We've got chaos!" - it's a very good level that deserves props for ;).

    Ehh? I'm rambling again - must be the morning coffee at work that gets me started for a "rough day of work".. er, maybe not.

  • Nemesis #20 10 years ago

    Monday morning and I can't believe we only got to 35 posts on this one...

    MOHAA m/player is superb, maybe something along those lines will come out on PS2 when the BB service gets going...

  • skalmanxl #21 10 years ago

    It looks like a lot of people here can't read...

  • UncleLou #22 10 years ago

    I must state a dissenting opinion. I bought this game on release day a few weeks ago and to refer to Gestalt's conclusions, Frontline is without doubt the worst first person shooter I've played on any platform in the last few years, and arguably the worst console shooter of recent times. Bad graphics (stiff animations etc.), boring, linear level design (apart from the first one), mediocre A.I., the same enemies over and over again and BAD controls. MoH:F is YEARS behind in comparison to games like Jedi Knight 2.

    For a review that imo hits the nail on the head, click here

  • Max Diablos #23 10 years ago

    I think Gestalt went a bit overboard with enthusing about the gameplay. Aside from the detail that men in full battle kit can't swim, I missed reading fleshed out descriptions of location and atmosphere. As a result the review didn't seem well rounded. While it may be worth 10/10, I don't see how the review justifies that score. Not being able to save mid-level is reason enough to mark the game down.
    Edited by Max Diablos at 24/06/02 @ 10:04

  • Blerk #24 10 years ago

    I think Gestalt went a bit overboard with enthusing about the gameplay

    Are we reviewing the review now? :-)

    Can't wait for 'US waking up time' later on. This could well be the 'biggest thread yet'. :-)

  • Viktor #25 10 years ago


    I'm surprised that the developers managed to create such an empty, lifeless (and corpseless) Omaha Beach. For some fluke reason I missed the captain in the water and ended up running around like a headless chicken, not dying, not living, in a strange state of time stoppage, where no one came to challenge my run around the sands of Normandy.

    Scripted sequences look cool, but in the end they will never be able immerse the player without tight railroading. It's too easy to break the game, and have the illusion dissipate.

    MOH:FL is an average shooter, based on my experiences. It has to compensate for the awkward Dualshock2-control by making the AI appear as incompent as the player. In the end it feels like war of the world's clumsiest shooters.

  • Tyronne #26 10 years ago

    At the end of the day scores are a bit pointless as what do you believe...10/10...95 %...stars.....when it comes down to it everyone plays games with a different outlook and so have there own idea about what its like...i know scores are just a guideline...but id just be happy with ..yeah you`ll like it...nah you`ll hate it....sling it in the bin......

  • Max Diablos #27 10 years ago

    Are we reviewing the review now? :-)

    Yes.

    At the end of the day scores are a bit pointless as what do you believe

    I don't entirely buy that. There are ways and means you can nail down aspects of games into percentages on a sliding scale. Ultimately they're no more than a rough guide and a good critical review alongside, that brings out the form of the subject, is essential. In this case I think Johns enthusiasms got the better of him by the look of it.

  • Nemesis #28 10 years ago

    I think the 10 should be a holy grail of scores personally.

  • Gestalt #29 10 years ago

    "Not being able to save mid-level is reason enough to mark the game down"

    That's largely down to personal preference. Some people can't stand games without save game systems (which is why I mentioned it in the review), others don't have a problem with it.

    Personally I think the best solution is the one Operation Flashpoint came up with, which was allowing you to save once per mission and including one or two auto-save checkpoints on the really long missions. That kept the tension up without forcing you to replay the entire mission from scratch if you got killed.

    As for Frontline, it was frustrating on a couple of the harder missions, but I walked away and came back to the game fresh and beat them eventually. And the tension it adds, knowing that you can't just quick load and carry on, is incredible.


    "There are ways and means you can nail down aspects of games into percentages on a sliding scale"

    No there aren't. :) Review scores are completely arbitrary at the end of the day. It's simply a distillation into a scale from nought to ten of how much the reviewer enjoyed the game and how they feel about it at the time they write the review. There is no scientific process that can produce an "accurate" or "definitive" score, whatever your scale.

  • Killerbee #30 10 years ago

    Shame there's no multiplayer. :-(

    I may still have to buy this anyway. I found the Dualshock2 took a bit of getting used to when aiming on MGS2 from the first-person perspective, but it soon became second nature. It doesn't beat mouse & keyboard though.

  • Nemesis #31 10 years ago

    I'm more than happy with the PC version. The dualshock takes some getting used to, but the mouse/keyboard took a while to get used to!

    I think we will always run into score arguments here......just don't give it a score at all!

  • pjmaybe #32 10 years ago

    It's a great game! PC purists can go hang, the game is good as it stands. It's not that different to the PC version anyway!

    Peej

  • Max Diablos #33 10 years ago

    That's largely down to personal preference. Some people can't stand games without save game systems (which is why I mentioned it in the review), others don't have a problem with it.

    The choice should still be there, especially as the choice could be made at the start of a game whether to enable or disable this facility. At the end of the day are games about how a player measures up to them or about unfolding an experience?

    There is no scientific process that can produce an "accurate" or "definitive" score, whatever your scale.

    I disagree. It depends on what aspect of a game you're looking at, and how well you're prepared to refine it. I'm not saying that it isn't without circumstantial bias. But, I don't buy the line game scoring is entirely beyond the reach of a systemic approach.
    Edited by Max Diablos at 24/06/02 @ 12:09

  • Super Stu #34 10 years ago

    heh, what hype? Not the 10/10 review I hope, as scores are just a matter of personal taste.

  • Max Diablos #35 10 years ago

    Not the 10/10 review I hope, as scores are just a matter of personal taste.

    So, if I gave the review a 4/10 score there won't be any arguing and bitterness around here. It's merely my opinion and doesn't serve as a useful descriptor of the underlying greatness of G's latest intellectual flounce... ;)

  • Gestalt #36 10 years ago

    That's a pretty pointless system IMO. For example, what if you have a game that's absolutely incredible but has very basic graphics? Take Kurukuru Kururin, for example. It's highly addictive, but even by GBA standards the graphics are lousy. So do you mark it down for that? Of course you shouldn't. Ditto for something like Vib Ribbon.

    If you lock yourself into a system whereby you mark different parts of a game seperately and then tally everything up and add in a bodge factor you'll often end up with something even less representative than simply picking a number out of thin air. The whole is more than the sum of the parts. :)

  • Nemesis #37 10 years ago

    I still say don't give it a mark. People will read the words and draw a conclusion, rather than hitting Next Page, Page Down then b1tching about Halo.

    Putting scores on reviews will only draw comparison. Personally I think a 10/10 for MOH is setting yourself up to abuse ;-)

  • bystander #38 10 years ago

    That's a pretty pointless system IMO. For example, what if you have a game that's absolutely incredible but has very basic graphics? Take Kurukuru Kururin, for example. It's highly addictive, but even by GBA standards the graphics are lousy. So do you mark it down for that? Of course you shouldn't. Ditto for something like Vib Ribbon.

    EG used to do that didn't it? A quick look at the Perfect Dark review, and it shows you've broken down the marks into Graphics, Gameplay, Sound and Value.

    Well at least you've realized the error of your ways. :p

    I guess then the best thing is to have the game reviewed by more than one person. And have each reviewer do a little piece on the game so we can have more than one viewpoint on the game.

    Edit: Grammar
    Edited by bystander at 24/06/02 @ 13:37

  • Super Stu #39 10 years ago

    Out of interest, we've just (or are in the middle of) changing our system to include scores (1-10), 6 being above average, so you can work out the rest of the numbers from there. It's going to be made obvious, though, that 10/10 doesn't mean a game is perfect, but that it is very, very good. As soon as people start realising this the sooner we'll stop getting the game score penis extension arguments (one would hope).

    Out of interest, we're also including a system whereby if a game scores 8-10, then the review goes to a small, pre-selected panel to ensure it warrants a high mark such as this. That way, you don't get Fanboy X lamenting game Y on a different system, or vice versa.

    :)

  • bystander #40 10 years ago

    It's going to be made obvious, though, that 10/10 doesn't mean a game is perfect, but that it is very, very good. As soon as people start realising this the sooner we'll stop getting the game score penis extension arguments (one would hope).

    Actually I feel perhaps letters are better for marks than numbers. The problem with numbers is that with something like 10/10 people tend to convert it to a percentage and (obviously) 10/10 is 100% which in most cases people view as perfect (I'm not saying its the right way to interpret scores though).

    If you do something like A+ people will see that its a very good game. As in say GCSEs getting a A+ doesn't mean you scored 100% though. It just means you did very well.

    Out of interest, we're also including a system whereby if a game scores 8-10, then the review goes to a small, pre-selected panel to ensure it warrants a high mark such as this.

    Sounds like a good solution. :)

  • Blerk #41 10 years ago

    we've just (or are in the middle of) changing our system to include scores

    Who's 'we', Stu? :-)

  • UncleLou #42 10 years ago

    That's exactly what I wanted to ask.

    So, who is "we", Stu?

  • Gestalt #43 10 years ago

    "EG used to do that didn't it"

    Nope, the old sub-sites Pocket Gamer and Console Gamer did it, but when we rolled everything into one site we stuck with the EG.net way of doing things.


    "I guess then the best thing is to have the game reviewed by more than one person"

    Like I've said before, that just isn't feasible. Writing a review only takes an hour or so, but it takes anything from four or five hours up to a week or more (depending on the game) to get to the point where you can write it up.


    "it would probably stop this kind of debate since the particular facet of the game has been addressed"

    It usually is addressed in the review. Like you said yourself, people should read the review instead of fixating on the score out of ten at the end of it. :)

  • Super Stu #44 10 years ago

    www.ntsc-uk.com

    Import news, reviews, advice and of course a Forum. Particular help is made towards those dipping their toes into the importing waters (TV problems etc).

    Gestalt - You once told me to post any links I thought relevant. There's one for you :)

    Gents - try it quick before management edit it out.

  • bystander #45 10 years ago

    Like I've said before, that just isn't feasible. Writing a review only takes an hour or so, but it takes anything from four or five hours up to a week or more (depending on the game) to get to the point where you can write it up.

    Fair enough. The comment section on each thread is usually a fair help as to whether to buy the game or not (unless the comments have deviated towards Marmite or Jaffa cakes).

    That aside I'll be happy to help you out if you'd be so kind as to send me a copy of the game (any PC game will do) for review. ;)

  • Blerk #46 10 years ago

    what are they going to do with game e.g. extras and new levels and mayby shock horror better graphics!

    Knowing EA.... none of those things. Expect a straight port of the PS2 version.

  • Gestalt #47 10 years ago

    Dunno how many times I have to say this, but the score at the end is simply how the reviewer feels about the game at the time they write the review. It's a bit pointless comparing the scores that two radically different games like Frontline and Halo get. One is a fairly fast-paced sci-fi shooter on the Xbox with sparkly graphics, the other is a historical game on the PS2 with vaguely realistic weapons and settings and a much more downbeat visual style. I happen to like Frontline more than Halo, that doesn't mean that one is definitively a better game and that everyone will like it more than the other one.

    Read the reviews, decide for yourself. Don't fixate on the scores.
    Edited by Gestalt at 24/06/02 @ 21:20

  • Mr_Sleep #48 10 years ago

    Personally i like tweaking my PC to make it run a game...although spending a whole day getting a network card to work can be a little...annoying ;)

    EG is one of the best reviewing sites around, so they might be console biased, they still give accurate reviews for every platform, as i see it their formula seems to rely on personal opinion and actual fun, this counts for a lot in my book.

  • otto #49 10 years ago

    You know guys, there *is* a difference between bias and an honest preference, openly stated and objectively justified. I don't see how you conclude that Gestalt is biased against PC games simply because he finds it frustrating that the finished product for that platform is generally far less polished than the finished product for any of the console platforms. As PC gamers you should be pleased that there are sites like this one which refuse to put up with that kind of shoddy treatment from publishers.

    Anyway, along with moaning about scores, accusations of bias are one of the guaranteed constants about life on the Eurogamer boards.
    Edited by otto at 24/06/02 @ 23:19

  • Mr_Sleep #50 10 years ago

    @otto, i wasn't complaining about the apparent bias or as you so rightly call it a preference. I have a preference for PC for a whole host of reasons, it is a personal preference, i just can't get on with consoles, do i try to force this on people who use consoles, no. There is an open market for a reason, for some reasons certain fanboys *cough*scum*cough* can't see it ;) (i really shouldn't say things like that :D )

  • Gestalt #51 10 years ago

    "since you have repeatedly publicized your dislike of PC gaming and its intricacies"

    Don't get me wrong, there are some types of game that are best on the PC - hardcore RPGs, real-time strategy games, serious simulators etc. And anything else that needs a lot of keyboard shortcuts. There are good PC games out there, developers just don't seem to put as much effort into them. Even a fairly mediocre console game has higher production values than the vast majority of PC games. Plus I'm really not a big fan of wasting time upgrading drivers, tracking down hardware issues and patching games when I should be playing. :) That's the single biggest advantage that consoles have over the PC when it comes to gaming.

  • Mr_Sleep #52 10 years ago

    @Gestalt, but don't you just love features like quicksave after every step ;)

    You are right about the patches but it does make an extra reason for frequenting the internet at work ;)

  • otto #53 10 years ago

    Mr Sleep, although I'm now finally a console owner I would still class myself as a PC gamer first and foremost, but I do wish that PC games were as polished as console games, I really do... :)

  • Gestalt #54 10 years ago

    "don't you just love features like quicksave after every step"

    Depends on the game. If anything I prefer a game that has been (well) designed from the ground up to have limited saves than one which can only be played by quick saving every five seconds. That's why I thought the D-Day mission in Allied Assault was a pain in the ass, whereas in Frontline it worked much better. Yes, on the PS2 I had to play through it three times to win, but I wasn't getting blown to pieces by pre-scripted mortars every other step up the beach.
    Edited by Gestalt at 24/06/02 @ 23:58

  • Mr_Sleep #55 10 years ago

    @otto, i agree, just look at Neverwinter Nights, a game that has been worked on for the better part of 3-4 years and there is a patch released within a week.

    Morrowind was like a beta test, they added things later that should have been included like the health bar.

    Polish seems to finally be there 5 months after the game is released ;)

  • Mr_Sleep #56 10 years ago

    @Gestalt, i was semi-joking, it does depend on the game, for instance Thief 2 allowed you to save whenever but that didn't diminish the tension one iota.

    Aliens Vs Predator - one of my favourite games ever -i managed to complete on the hardest setting without using saves, the save patch really ruined that game, it seemed to remove the tension.

    I agree with your overall point though :)

  • Dizzy #57 10 years ago

    10/10??????

    The AI in this game is a stupid as it gets. Germans walking backwards while you wack them on the head. I agree with some of the previous post. maybe Eurogamer should stop giving scores. This better than Halo? I don't think so....

  • skalmanxl #58 10 years ago

    All the innovation comes from computers not consoles

    Hohoho, bye now, don't let the door hit you in the arse on the way out.

    Ok... it's a good game, I agree totally... but 10/10 is wrong. I know 10/10 doesn't apply to perfect, but it's just plain wrong, for comparison purposes.

    Screw me blue, know what, lets introduce a facist-state internet where opinions are wrong and everyone have to think as you do. We'll have NO MORE personal opinions about games.

    since you have repeatedly publicized your dislike of PC gaming and its intricacies

    Refering to that "You Suck" editorial are we? What's so intricate about morons having access to electronic entertainment equipment?

    You know guys, there *is* a difference between bias and an honest preference, openly stated and objectively justified.

    Exactly! I should kiss you otto, but I'll let you off. I prefer Xbox and PS2, so what people? I don't own a GC (but I'll be getting one as soon as economy allows) so I can't prefer that one.

    hardcore RPGs

    Such as the finely tuned versions of FF7 and 8? Hoho, don't answer that one, I was taking the piss, I know what you mean.

    Actually, I have little problem with the scores Eurogamer gives games, but I probably would prefer to see them not give scores on their reviews.

    Agreed, remove the scores=remove trolls!

  • Nemesis #59 10 years ago

    Remove score, Trolls b1tch about grammar instead!

  • skalmanxl #60 10 years ago

    But Nem, trolls can't read letters, only numbers.

  • Blerk #61 10 years ago

    Remove score, Trolls b1tch about grammar instead!

    How can you use more vowels in your Medal of Honour review than in your review of Halo? Halo has FAR LESS consonants!!!! And it has MORE CAPITAL LETTERS! You are clearly all dyslexic.

  • skalmanxl #62 10 years ago

    You give trolls too much credit Blerk...you think they know all those words?

  • Nemesis #63 10 years ago

    I suspect it would be along the lines of "You gave 3 pages to MOHAA but only 2 to Halo..."

    I can see it now...
    Edited by Nemesis at 25/06/02 @ 10:24

  • otto #64 10 years ago

    Hey dinx! Well http://sheltiestar.tripod.com/poetry3.htm says this:

    With The Old Breed, by E. B. Sledge is probably in the library of every avid reader in the Mobile, Alabama. [..] His WWII book became an instant hit with Mobilians and each signed copy he inscribed under his name the following:

    "And when to heaven he goes
    To St. Peter he'll tell
    Another Marine reporting Sir
    I've served my time in hell."
    Author Unknown

    Another site I found said that it had been found as graffiti on a wall in Naples during WWII, perhaps this is where Sledge got it from.

    oh & marmite r00lz :)
    Edited by otto at 25/06/02 @ 11:39

  • Super Stu #65 10 years ago

    Otto.. you're far too good with your search engines. I couldn't find the damn thing.

    Fantastic bit of prose, nevertheless.

  • otto #66 10 years ago

    Fantastic bit of prose, nevertheless

    what, "marmite r00lz"? Ta ;)

    I always use alltheweb.com, I've never understood why everyone swears by google.

  • otto #67 10 years ago

    dinx - :) 'search engine 0wnage' is I believe the phrase - anyway you're welcome!

    Mike - next time, you want to try using www.makeashorterlink.com cos that comment ain't gonna last for long ;)

  • skalmanxl #68 10 years ago

    Blood in a console game? Nah, it might affect little Timmy! Also whats this 'Aim' function all about? Is that to remove the need for skill and the burden of using a far superior mouse and keyboard combo?

    Sounds like Medal of Honour Allied Assault, didn't it have a autoaim for singleplayer, and no blood? That wasn't on a console now was it?

    Until you've played games like Wolfenstein online with 32 poeple using tactics and team play you really dont know what you are depriving yourselves of

    No offence, but I'd rather play a game with any form of quality in it. Wolfenstein was one of the dumbest and crappiest games of last year. Shit in a box I say. Entirely saved by the multiplayer, and even that got old.




    Anyway, lets have a change of subject. Have anyone played "Dirty Dozen" on PC? A WWII FPS (oooh new concept!) which had quite a good demo...wondering if anyone played it, is it any good?

  • Gestalt #69 10 years ago

    "Also whats this 'Aim' function all about? Is that to remove the need for skill and the burden of using a far superior mouse and keyboard combo?"

    If you actually read the review you'd see that it actually adds to the range of skills in the game, as you can now duck and lean around a lot more flexibly using the dual shock than you can in Allied Assault using a mouse and keyboard.

  • skalmanxl #70 10 years ago

    If you actually read the review

    Gestalt, you are giving the trolls way too much credit, you know trolls can't read.

  • Gestalt #71 10 years ago

    True, all those years of living under bridges must have a terrible impact on their education.

  • skalmanxl #72 10 years ago

    It was "Deadly Dozen", a budget game only released in the US, and yes it was pretty good.

    Ah, thanks for the correction. Didn't Infogrames release that one, odd, it looked quite good, played well too.

  • otto #73 10 years ago

    well you can guess the rest

    Threatening Thirteen?

  • CHAKA #74 7 years ago

    Otto wrote:
    I always use alltheweb.com, I've never understood why everyone swears by google.

    /sniggers