Medal of Honor

Blog Post: A lackluster shooter with nothing new to offer

Andrew Marcos — Mon, 01 Oct 2012 22:34:00 GMT

Medal of Honor is a 2010 reboot of the longtime first person shooter series and game of the same name made in 1999, one that started on the Playstation and made World War II games cool before they were overdone by countless imitators and games set in the time period. This one attempts to bring the series back to the modern day and uses the recent war in the middle east as a setting, but unfortunately despite its claims of trying to remain true to the source, it ends up playing like an unpolished Call of Duty title that uses the war as a gimmick and has almost no relation to the series. It could have been a new IP, but instead further waters down the Medal of Honor name, and the new team behind it doesn’t do a meaningful job of executing some of the potential the game has.

The single player campaign puts players in the shoes of several soldiers on the ground as well as an apache gunner, but you could be forgiven if you don’t care about any of them or even remember their names (yes, they are given names). The story has a few cutscenes and attempts a few moments of exposition or emotion, but falls flat each time and just doesn’t feel like anything I haven’t seen before. Despite what should have been a simple story that could have focused on the soldiers and the war, they didn’t give me any reason to care about the people involved and made the whole thing feel less like a real life event and more like the machinations of a Michael Bay movie, with some very clichéd plot points being brought up repeatedly. Of course, I doubt anyone will be buying the game for the story, but the emphasis on real life events is lost when the story doesn’t do any justice to them.

The gameplay is certainly fun and works, but considering the improvements on the genre in these last years it would be hard for them to screw up the controls or basics. Of course the gunplay is actually solid thanks to the wonderful recoil and “ra-ta-tat” sounds of the weapons you fire giving a sense of power and some of the enemy animations bringing a sort of perverse satisfaction when you bring a foe down with a long range sniper bullet to the head. Certain elements like the addition of a lean on controller and ability to hold a pistol separate to your main weapons are very nice and make me wonder why more games haven’t done this (not least of which is the Call of Duty series, which apparently forces players to keep all their guns on the same back holster). But even these nice little additions can’t save the battles and gameplay, since so many firefights are predictable and happen on a linear path you have no control over, while the AI (both friendly and enemy) are incredibly dull in combat and can’t even fathom how to run and shoot at the same time, or even run away from a grenade I very visibly tossed at them.

Once the appallingly short single player campaign is over, players do have the option to play Tier 1 mode, which raises the challenge and removes checkpoints, but given the generic nature of the campaign I’d advise against it unless you really want to go for the achievements/trophies. The meat of any modern first person shooter nowadays can be found in the multiplayer, and with DICE at the helm the online portion is certainly fun, but much like the single player it’s a case of some good ideas with poor execution, and the change in developer means that it also plays differently from the single player in some odd ways, with the ability to lean, go prone and carry an extra gun all lost. You could argue they all might present balance issues, but similar games have no issue bringing these abilities to the multiplayer while balance almost seems like an afterthought in the competitive matches of Medal of Honor.

The multiplayer is very bare bones, with only a few maps and modes at the outset and absolutely no support for co-operative play or splitscreen, two things competing titles like Call of Duty and Halo offer in every recent title. Even the graphics and power at display don’t seem to offer any justification for removing these features and watering down the framerate from a Modern Warfare title when the additional player count is minor and the visual effects are significantly less impressive then what you can find on the much larger Battlefield: Bad Company titles. Probably the biggest gaffe one might find is the inclusion of Taliban soldiers as a team in multiplayer, which given recent events is in poor taste, and even EA was unable to stick by their words of “artistic integrity” when they renamed them in a spineless move, classy.

Of course there is some fun to be found, as mentioned the gunplay is still stellar and with DICE at the helm it isn’t a terrible experience, but the lack of content and weapons will have players abandoning the game for greener pastures in no time. The balance issues talked about above are also frequent and annoying, with some maps being impossible to win in when playing as certain teams. The defending team in many maps has a tendency to use vantage points and a lack of entry ways to clear out attackers, then use the “scorechain” attacks to decimate them with their accumulated points. Yes, they even take killstreaks then rename them, but in this case they concern points over kills and the rewards are much less satisfying to use then anything you can earn in Call of Duty, or even any of the abilities you can use anytime in a Battlefield title.

Overall, Medal of Honor is a flubbed attempt at reviving an ailing franchise in the hopes of taking down juggernaut shooter Call of Duty. If this attempt is any indication, then EA should just wave the white flag and stop focusing on taking down the competition that has them clearly outmatched in this battle.

Blog Post: Medal of honor+modern times= good shooter

Juanolo — Wed, 21 Mar 2012 20:34:00 GMT

I took a chance with Medal of Honor. In some ways, I it's good, but some ways it doesn't. Still, Medal of honor is a good shooter that even though it's not amazing, it still pretty fun.

Graphics are descent. It has moments, but they can be pretty good at times to. Story all right. Gameplay is good. Multiplayer all right. It almost a Bad company 2 copy, except not as good.

Overall, Medal of Honor is an all right shooter. It is a really fun game. That's why I'll give Medal of honor a

8.5 out of 10

Blog Post: Emotional Appeal Meets Subpar Gameplay

Alex Hanavan — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:05:00 GMT

As Medal of Honor departs from its roots of World War II it shifts the tone and mood for the entire game. After watching the “Leave A Message” trailer the summer before the game’s release it was instantly on my radar. A good game invokes emotion in the player and leaves an impact that they will remember long after playing it. Medal of Honor valiantly strives to deliver an emotional experience and although they do a lot of things very well, the game as a whole doesn’t quite measure up to other modern FPS campaigns.

The game follows eight characters for a majority of the campaign, switching between two squads of four soldiers. A few of the soldiers are very unique and by the end of the game you begin to somewhat feel for them, but even then there isn’t much depth to be explored within their personalities. Medal of Honor does a nice job with bringing out emotion during certain sequences, mainly through the subtle, yet powerful score. Instead of constantly throwing harsh, loud action music at you throughout the entire game as most shooters are accustomed to doing, what you hear is a soundtrack that makes you feel like what you’re doing actually matters. It’s the kind of music that you associate with a character dying or some other tragic event that you know you can’t avoid.

Beyond the emotional appeal of the game there are several mishaps that detract from an otherwise good experience. Although the environments are fairly rich and convincing, many of the characters and buildings are devoid of any detail or originality. That being said, the cutscenes looks gorgeous and it’s a pleasure to just sit back and watch. Gameplay wise there isn’t a lot of variety, especially considering everything that we have come to expect from the stereotypical modern shooter. With the lack of high octane set piece moments it’s easy to become bored with the repetitive mission structures.

Medal of Honor gives a good look into modern warfare and it’s very cool to be able to get a picture of what some of our soldiers really go through during their time in the Middle East. What it lacks in polished gameplay and features it counteracts with emotion and storytelling. It might not be the most finely crafted FPS out there but it provides a great departure from the average setting and thrusts you into the harsh reality of what today’s war looks like in Afghanistan.

Blog Post: Completely Worthless

BATTLESUIT — Sun, 31 Jul 2011 08:23:00 GMT

Why did I give this game a 1? Because I can't even play it!!!

I play console FPS games with lefty sticks. How this game got released in this day and age without even having this option, let alone a fully mappable controller is beyond poor. I'll never even consider buying another game with Danger Close's name attached to it, and I consider this a blemish on both EA and DICE's reputations.

Blog Post: Medal of Honor a decent war FPS

MrThembones — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:59:00 GMT

From what I played of this game, its pretty good. The controls are basic, that of every modern shooter.

The graphics are stunning, as well. At first, I though it was going to be much like CoD, which really it isn't. It's not as linear as most common FPS games, and the action in it is fluid and fun. The weapons all look great, and very detailed.

The multiplayer was some what enjoyable, often a bit laggy. At times it felt like a battlefield game mixed with the action of MW2 (wonder why...) which was ok, kept the action going. There are a few glitches though, I have often gotten stuck on objects or similar happenings. Sniping was fun, as well putting someone down with my M4 fury.

The campaign was short, however. And some parts were often dull, but not too much so where it lost my interest. Its a good game all around, just not that great, and the replay value is somewhat low, minus the multiplayer.

Blog Post: medal 7.50

jordan — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 05:13:00 GMT

I have played the game and it satisfies me although it is really dramatic so it has you thinking what going to happen next who's going to die next the whole time your playing.But if you have playstation network its a whole diffrent battle.

Blog Post: Definitely worth checking out

Cris Jensen — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 23:01:00 GMT

Regardless of how addicted or committed to the "call of duty" franchise you are, this game is definitely something worth checking out. When I first started playing this game I was like uhhhh another military first-person shooter, and that's exactly what it is. In my own personal opinion this game does not bring anything new to the table when it comes to first person shooters. Get a mission objective, shoot some guys and throw some grenades,yell out some military jargon here and there, save your fellow soldier and of course listen to the brass **** and moan.

What I really enjoy about this game was the storyline, while I played it I felt heroic and part of the story. something unfortunately "call duty black ops" do not make me feel. And of course the ending was just icing on the cake.

It plays just like any other first-person shooter now and days you use the right trigger to shoot, the left trigger to aim, the Y button to change weapons, so on and so forth. The game is a little glitchy though,every now and then you'll see a player's foot go through the map or an enemy just fly across the screen like a rag doll at random. The weapons felt authentic, and the music was just amazing. I think that's one of the big pluses of this game was the musical score. I did feel however that the game was a bit short, I wish I was a little longer. and being a service member myself I love how they put the little tribute at the end of the game to all the soldiers out there. Controversy aside that was a good call.

The multiplayer was okay it definitely is not up there with call of duty, Halo, and these other big-name multiplayer games out there. But it's definitely something you should check out.

Blog Post: Was it Worth the Wait?

Goodfellas — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:02:00 GMT

Medal of Honor is good but not as good as it was expected to be. The game definitely has its strong points, but lacks in to many other ways.

Presentation: The graphics seem very inconsistent. The background environments look absolutely gorgeous from afar, but the closer you get you notice they actually look pretty bad. The character models look good for the most part. The game looks promising graphically, but it doesn't come all the way through.

Campaign: The campaign for Medal of Honor is nothing special. It is a blend of the other great first-person shooter games. MOH mixes around the gameplay so one mission is going through a village wiping out everything and the next is riding in vehicles or being stealthy as you overlook an enemy base. The game does have vehicles that you get to use throughout, as well as using lasers to target air strikes. The actual combat plays out like Battlefield Bad Company 2, but the level designs and missions play out like the Call of Duty series. There isn't really a problem with the game, its just that it has all been done before and to a better level.

Multiplayer: The online play is supposed to be the perfect mix of tactical and action. For the most part it does do that. When you start a match you pick a class to be, much like Battlefield. The classes are rifleman, sniper, and Special Ops, it would have been nice to see another class to use. One thing that really seemed to lack to me was each class has no special things about them. In Battlefield each man had something about them that made you want to be them. Another thing that was lacking was the amount of weapons. You very rarely get to see any new ones. The maps are fun for the most part because they are designed to not favor any one class, and this is true for the most part. Multiplayer was fairly fun to play, it was not up to the standards of DICE's previous Battlefield accomplishment.

Medal of Honor looked like it had potential. The game isn't too bad, it just doesn't bring anything new or special. It also looked good graphically for the most part. The game was fairly entertaining, however I set my expectations too high. Overall I give this game an 8.0/10.

Forum Post: Medal Of Honor

Ryan Porter — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 16:28:00 GMT

did any1 else notice tht 1 of ur partners in the dessert level, is named jimmy patterson and jimmy paterson is like the main character in the ww2 part of the series

Blog Post: Game Over... continue? Medal of Honor

Game Over... continue? — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 23:59:00 GMT

Here's a riddle: which came first, the chicken or the egg? While this causality conundrum has perplexed philosophers for centuries, we gamers have a similar question... of the brilliant World War II shooters which came first, Medal of Honor or Call of Duty? The answer is, and I didn't know this, Medal of Honor. But when CoD departed from its WWII roots and changed the landscape of the industry with Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, the MoH franchise was left in the dust. However, having played their newest attempt to wrest control from the CoD behemoth, I'm surprised and happy to say that I really enjoyed it. While you could say it's just another fish in the overpopulated pond of military shooters, the gritty realism of Medal of Honor spoke to me... more so than the over the top action of recent Call of Duty titles.

But let's not beat about the bush, Medal of Honor shares a great deal with Call of Duty. The controls are exactly the same. The action is, for the most part, almost identical. The gunplay is obviously similar. The level design and set up is virtually a carbon copy, right down to the obligatory sniping missions and flyovers by C-130's. All in all, there are far more similarities than differences. But I think the story in MoH is far more believably realistic and, in its way, far more scary...

You follow the exploits of the elite special forces operatives of Tier 1 as they battle tooth and nail against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Because the location is in the news everyday, most people have a passing understanding of not just the unforgiving environment, but the tenacity of the enemy. The plot is a standard 'war' tale, typical fodder for movies and games for ages now. It revolves around a group of soldiers who get screwed over by the top brass. The pencil pushers in Washington, drunk on American superiority, are concerned with logistics and the overall outcome nevermind the situation in the field. But because they are the ones who ultimately call the shots, tragically those soldiers on the ground sometimes suffer from their shortsighted ineptitude. It turns into another "We don't leave our people behind!" story. But a true soldier doesn't leave anyone behind, regardless of orders, no matter the how overwhelming the odds...

I think the reason I found it so compelling is that you can actually imagine it happening. The infamous, over-the-top action scenes that CoD are more for entertainment purposes than being anchored in reality. In MoH, those sequences are replaced by what I would more naturally associate with what really happens in war, or at least what I assume it to be having never been in battle myself. There is one scene in particular where you are in the boots of an Army Ranger and everything has gone FUBAR (look it up if you don't know what it means). Your squad has fallen back to some dilapidated huts and the Taliban are pouring out of the mountains to overwhelm your position. Your ammunition is running low, and there is no hope of survival... well, it's more than a little intense. When I finished Medal of Honor, I sat there for a moment, although it was 2 AM, and thought about the people who actually do this... who are actually fighting half the world away. I'm no fan of the wars that we are currently involved in, but that's not to say I don't respect the men and women of our Armed Forces who are risking everything to bring liberty and stability to those parts of the world that suffer from oppression and tyranny.

Aside from the narrative, there are some other minor design differences to CoD. First, while there isn't a true cover mechanic, you can now 'slide' into cover if you are sprinting and then crouch. Thank you DICE, I appreciate that... it's nice to be able to get out of the line of fire more quickly. I also really liked the grenade effects. If one goes off near you and you manage to survive the blast, the concussion will mute the surrounding chaos and cause the screen to shudder. I hope and pray I'm never on the business end of a frag grenade, but I imagine that to be a fairly accurate representation. The ally AI is pretty good, although these Tier 1 guys still can't seem to get out of your line of fire. Sorry I shot you in the ass mate, you probably should have looked before you moved up! Another addition I liked is the ability to request ammo. In most games in this genre, you end up using the enemies weapons against them because you run out of ammunition. By giving you the option to borrow ammo from your squad mates, you get to keep your superior weaponry. That is greatly appreciated, I'm sick of dusty AK-47's...

Graphically MoH looks very good, but I think that I'd have to give the nod to the CoD franchise on this score. The environments, especially the infamous tunnel riddled mountains of Afghanistan, are very impressive. But sadly, I think that the explosions, specifically the debris, are far too pixelated and don't appear nearly as believable. But ironically, when there is a major explosion and there is dust in the air it looks quite realistic. There was also some minor texture loading issues at the beginning of some scenes which was mildly annoying, but the action was pretty smooth over all.

The sound work is good as well, although I had the same problem with MoH that has plagued me with most military shooters... when the action really heats up and the bullets are flying, I can't seem to focus on what my commanding officer is telling me to do. As a result, I keep nailing wave after wave of Taliban, but not actually getting anywhere. It's easy to lose track of your next objective until you finally get shot one too many times and have to do it all over again. Apart from that minor complaint about the genre in general though, MoH sounds great. The voice acting, while laden with familiar 'war' cliches, is well done, and the soundtrack is pretty decent.

One of the reasons I think MoH didn't get reviewed as well as it's contemporary counterparts is apparently the multiplayer isn't up to par. Considering that online multiplayer is really the reason most people by these sorts of games, I'm not surprised. But since I don't play online much, this isn't an issue for me. All I can tell you is that I enjoyed the single player campaign more than I have the last several CoD games...

In an over-saturated market chalked full of similar product Medal of Honor doesn't really do much to distinguish itself from the competition. Is that necessarily a bad thing though? I'm gonna say no. It's comparing apples to apples in my opinion. If you like these types of games, it's definitely worth checking out, but don't be surprised if you catch yourself sighing at some points and thinking you've done it before, because you have. But the plot provided me with a surprising insight into what our service men and women might actually be facing, and I surprised myself by how much I was affected by it. The camaraderie, the horror of battle, the sacrifices that are made without hesitation because it is their duty is delivered to the player in a way I haven't experienced quite like this before. Perhaps it's a lack of pretension in the presentation, perhaps it's just the subject matter... I'm not sure. I know a few people in the military, and whenever we talk about what they have endured I can always tell it's with a forced patience... like explaining something to a child. The fact is if you haven't experienced what they have, you have no frame or reference and can't possibly understand. While I've always understood that to some degree, it's surprising and impressive that a video game could drive it home so forcefully.

Cheers,

Score = 9.0 / 10

P.S. After the story has ended but before the credits roll, the good people at DICE have put in some text talking about the real service men and women currently fighting for us around the world. I won't tell you what it says, but please... take the time to read it. It made me think... we mustn't forget to appreciate what we have, and what others have given so that we can enjoy the things that make us happy no matter how ultimately inconsequential they might be... like video games;^)

P.P.S. Want to read more reviews? Go to Game Over... continue?!

Blog Post: Can Medal of Honor Reclaim Its Throne Among The FPS Kings?

DrJoeystein — Sat, 25 Dec 2010 03:11:00 GMT

Have you played any of the Medal of Honor games? My favorite ones are Rising Sun and Frontline. Man, those were some great shooters. I remember playing both of those games all the time as a kid. But eventually, Call of Duty took Medal of Honor's place in my gaming heart. As a result, I lost interest in the Medal of Honor franchise. Even though Call of Duty had taken the entirety of my gaming heart, I still had a little bit of room left for Medal of Honor, so I gave Airborne a chance. It was nothing compared to Call of Duty, and that little love I had left for the franchise was crushed by the weight of Call of Duty.

I remember hearing about the new Medal of Honor a year ago. I was very surprised to see that instead of returning to the World War 2 theater, Medal of Honor was stepping out of its usual premise into modern war times. This reminded me of when Infinity Ward risked a move like this, and it sure paid off for them in the end! If they could do something like that for Call of Duty, I believed the same could happen for Medal of Honor. Over time, many impressive trailers and footage of the game made me more convinced that Medal of Honor was going to gain back the FPS crown it once wore. Sadly, it did not achieve that coveted goal. But that doesn’t mean Medal of Honor didn’t get close…

(This is a near complete summary of a mission from the campaign. Not necessary to read.)
Your mission begins in the passenger seat of a dirty, beat-up truck, making its way along the bumpy roads of the Afghanistan mountains. Voodoo, your comrade driving the truck, is steadily approaching a small village guarded by the Taliban. Because of the disguises you and your comrades are wearing, getting past the patrol was easily accomplished. Everything was going to plan smoothly…much too smoothly. This causes you and Voodoo to get a little concerned, but that doesn’t deter either of the men from their objective. After driving about midway through the village, gunfire breaks out! Voodoo quickly puts the vehicle in reverse and steps on the gas. Objects and bullets fly around you as the truck bounces and jerks down the paths of the village. Finally, Voodoo manages to get the truck away from the skirmish, allowing you to get your battle gear together. The fight to your target begins in a long alleyway quickly invaded by some Taliban, who are taken out easily by you and Voodoo. Scrambling down the alleyway with some sharp turns, you meet up with two comrades that also escaped from the ambush. They’re getting overwhelmed by the enemy! Thankfully, you and Voodoo make it just in time to assist them. Exposed in this open area of the village, you quickly slide to cover behind a damaged wall. With a few well-tossed grenades and support from your teammates, the area is secured quickly.
“Kill the lights,” Voodoo says as you enter the building the Taliban used to defend the open area with. A quick slash of your knife cuts the wires providing electricity to the building, and everything goes black. You and Voodoo take advantage of the darkness and the building’s small rooms with night vision goggles and shotguns. With this equipment, the Taliban never knew what hit them. You and Voodoo kick open a door leading outside to some rooftops, which you run across shortly after. Some more Taliban are encountered and taken down. But one is missed, and this one happens to have an RPG, which is used to collapse the floor of a house you and Voodoo are standing on. Thankfully, the fall wasn’t too bad, and the mission continues. Instead of more buildings, you come across a large playground, and opposite that playground are some more Taliban in another building. Quickly vaulting over a wall, you and Voodoo quickly take cover behind the poorly kept objects in the playground. The building, once cleared out, is said to have the objective inside: a hostage with important information. With caution, you and Voodoo hike up some stairs to a room with a man strapped to a chair inside. The body is quickly inspected to make sure this man is the package. “GET DOWN!” Voodoo yells suddenly before violently kicking the chair-bound body off the ledge of the building. A small explosion rocks the air, knocking both men too the ground. “Not our guy,” Voodoo says before leaving the building with you, continuing the search for the hostage.

This is an example of one of the missions from Medal of Honor. Action packed, random, and familiar. The whole game is a lot like the sentence I just wrote. Medal of Honor is a great game, but it‘s not unique. It’s like a combination of Call of Duty and Battlefield. But that doesn’t mean you’re getting the best of both worlds with this game.

I’ll start out with the gameplay. It was easy to pick up the controller and start playing. But in this case, that’s not a good thing. The controls for the game are exactly like Call of Duty’s, except for one button. I like games that have their own control scheme you recognize, like Call of Duty. When I started playing Medal of Honor, I kept thinking of Call of Duty…that’s not a good thing. Even though the controls aren’t original, they were responsive and easy to use. One unique move to Medal of Honor is that you can perform a slide to cover. When you’re near a crate, for example, if you press O, your character will slide to it. This can be frustrating at times when you slide to the wrong side of an object, or you go to an object you don’t want to move to, but I think this could be tweaked in future Medal of Honor titles to function better. One thing that doesn’t have to be changed is vehicle controls. Piloting a helicopter and an AC-130 was pretty cool. But there are more problems, like the AI. Why do I complain about the AI? Because they’re stupid. One strange moment I had with the game was when a Taliban stood in front of me for several seconds without shooting at me. I made it through the entire campaign on the hardest difficulty with much ease because of the AI. I enjoy challenges, and Medal of Honor wasn’t one.

Next I’ll talk about the story…oh, I don‘t even remember it. I was very disappointed in the plot and characters. The whole game is a confusing bundle of random (but still fun) missions with one, single objective: Kill. The. Taliban. It seems as if Danger Close (the developer of the game) tried to give the impression that the game has a deeper plot than what I just said, but underneath the layer of non-existent emotion and extra dialogue in the game, it all adds up to just killing Taliban. By the way, the characters are there. You just won’t care. Even the guy on the cover and in every trailer of the game plays a minor role in the game. He looks cool, but that doesn’t mean he’s memorable. I’ll mention one more thing about the story. One of the main characters dies. I won’t say who, but I did not feel any kind of emotion when he passed away. Please, Danger Close. Please make a better story with better characters next time.

I’m going to tell you about the sound, which will bring about a change of pace. Absolutely outstanding. You weren’t expecting me to say that, were you? I was blown away by the sound effects and music. All of the weapons sound very realistic, I’d even say they are on par with Call of Duty and Battlefield. I feel like I’m in control of the gun, like I’m really holding it in my hands. Another aspect of the sound is the music. I thoroughly enjoyed listening to the melodious and upbeat songs composed by Ramin Djawadi. He combines “Aladdin” instruments with orchestra strings that results in beautifully blended music. I like his work so much, that I’m considering buying the whole CD off of iTunes. The voice acting is mediocre, but that doesn’t change my view on the sound. Well done, Medal of Honor. You get an A+ in this category.

Finally, I will close this part of my review with the graphics. I thought the visuals were pretty nice. There were some “wow” moments in the game. After climbing up an icy mountain to the very top, looking at the morning sun drenching a valley of flowers and some snow-peaked mountains with radiant orange light was an amazing sight and a nice distraction from the war-torn battlefield. The Afghan/Iraq landscape was captured excellently, and I enjoyed traveling around the country. Guns look good too, can’t say much about them. But I think the character models need a little polishing. No one is recognizable. By that, I mean no one in the game looks unique. The only differences the characters had were different kinds of beards, and as many people know, beards are very important in Medal of Honor. :P I will give credit to the cut scenes, which are very detailed. Overall, the graphics are extremely nice, but the character models put a slight damper on making the graphics top notch.

I think of the average 3D action movie as I write about this game. Medal of Honor sure is pretty, and it sounds fantastic. But the story lacks a lot of luster and the game itself isn’t original. I’d say Medal of Honor is meant to be rent, or should be bought when caught on sale. (did you see what I did there?) The campaign will last you around 7-10 hours, and multiplayer is worth checking out for about a day or so. Speaking of multiplayer, DICE worked on it (the developer of Battlefield). I think it’s fine…but it’s not as good as Bad Company 2. Why play Medal of Honor’s multiplayer when you could play DICE’s own game with a more fun, robust multiplayer? I think the point is that the game has a decent campaign and multiplayer, but the current FPS kings are what you should invest your money in. Even though Medal of Honor isn’t the best, I think that the series is getting back on the right track. Still, Medal of Honor is going to have to work harder to reclaim its crown and become an FPS king once more.

Blog Post: Decent

moneymike08 — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 17:37:00 GMT

This is one the best MOH to date in my opinion. I have always been a fan of the MOH series and was amped up when I heard about the release of the new MOH a couple of months ago. But ultimately I was not as impressed as I thought I would be. There were a lot of glitches during gameplay and it seemed as if the game was just going through the motions of a FPS. I did enjoy the ending dedicated in memory of all our soldiers current and fallen who have served in our military. They died in honor.

I enjoyed the game for the most part. It was cool to be able to gun down some taliban from the side of an Apache gunship, but that was probably the memorable part of the game. Oh well, maybe the sequel, which I am sure there will be, will be much better. Here's hoping.

Blog Post: Medal of Honor Should Get a Purple Heart

Flying Bags — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 06:14:00 GMT

Once standing as the definitive shooter experience, the "Medal of Honor" franchise has been overshadowed by the "Call of Duty" juggernaut in the past couple of years. For this franchise reboot, EA took the series away from its WWII roots and put it into modern combat. EA is desperately trying to win back some of their loyal fans with this game, but unfortunately, they don't do anything new to evolve the series-nor the genre.

The six-hour long campaign does a decent job of providing a credible story that is not as cheesy as one would expect. Taking place in Afghanistan during the first stages of the war there, Medal of Honor follows the story of four Tier 1 operators, elite members of the US military. The characters are likeable and there is actually a tangible connection between them. You will often be tasked to save the life of the soldier you were just playing as in the previous mission.

Unfortunately, there is very little variety in the gameplay. Nearly all the missions involve you shooting bad guys as you attempt to reach your next objective. There are some cool stealth segments, as well as a cliché sniper mission, but nothing stands out once the credits start to roll.

One major flaw is that the presentation is really inconsistent. While at times the game looks great, there are certain aspects that can really hurt your eyes. The character models look horrible, and the blood looks like a bunch of red squares. Thankfully, the sound design is top notch; every shot fired that hits you in the gut, as well as the grenades, makes you flinch as they go off near you. The soundtrack does an admirable job of setting the mood, avoiding the rule that all games set in this type of location need to have a Middle Eastern soundtrack.

There are also some nice details that help build a sense of realism. You can adjust the rate of fire in most weapons, and there is actually a function that lets you lean around corners. However, the enemy lacks any intelligence whatsoever, which turns every mission into a shooting gallery-something that takes away from the realism the developers were trying to convey. Also, there appears to be some effort put into making the game gorier than most shooters, but again, this just falls flat with sloppy presentation.

The multiplayer feature is a fun distraction for what it's worth. The action is tense and the maps are really well designed, with tight corners and plenty of sniping roosts. However, the lasting appeal is not as great as one would expect: there are very few maps and even fewer game modes, all of which have been done before.

It is a lot of fun once you get into it, and there is a decent upgrading system in place, but it is hard not to feel like they left some part of the multiplayer from the game in order to charge you more money once the downloadable content comes out. Not only was the multiplayer feature designed by a completely different studio, but it also used a different engine than the single player; and although they look similar, there are major gameplay changes. You cannot go prone or lean in multiplayer, and the cool slide-move present in the single player is gone; the guns also feel completely different, making it a completely different game. Some might say you are getting two games for the price of one, but it just comes off as lazy design.

Overall, "Medal of Honor" is a run of the mill, shooter-themed game. While the fact that you are officially fighting the Taliban is refreshing, the gameplay suffers from repetition and visual glitches. If you must play it get a rental-EA should have really left this one cooking in the oven a bit longer before trying to compete with others of its kind.

Blog Post: There are plenty of used copies at Gamestop. What's to lose?

Jammin Jones — Sat, 13 Nov 2010 02:41:00 GMT

I bought this game at Gamestop used to try out before purchasing Black Ops, and I have to say that I might not take it back. There are plenty of used copies at Gamestop so you'll have nothing to lose if you don't like it, so just go get the dang game and stop reading this. But if you must...

I must say that GI got this one wrong. Thanks Jeff, but it seems that you reviewed this game through the prizm of its peers rather than by its own merits for entertainment. This game is not Call of Duty any more than Armagedon is Apollo 13. Do not go into this thinking you're going to see near apocalypse set pieces because you'll be as disappointed as a boy walking behind a hot blond wearing a miniskirt on a calm day. This game is all about bringing the player into the boots of an actual US armed forces serviceman. Still, there are moments in the game that will elicit moments of awe at the sheer awesomeness of US Tier 1 operatives.

The pros: Great graphics, incredible and realistic sound effects, fluid game play with a storyline that the player can actually follow with a real world context. Close range shotgun blasts directed at America's arch enemies are particularly satisfying. A campaign that is definitely worth checking out.

The cons: the online multi player falls short of its peers therefore adding little value, awful vehicle controls (the quad experience is distractingly bad), the achievements are just annoying to get so don't get this game to farm achievements.

Blog Post: Eh. It's O.K.

whooopie! — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 21:55:00 GMT

I personally enjoyed the new Medal Of Honor. The campaign was iffy because it felt like you were throwing rather than shooting the guns. Multiplayer is a little bit better than campaign unless you randomly lag every 1/15 games. The unlocks were lame and if your used really customizing than you won't like it.

Forum Post: Re: Medal of Honor

phantom_killa — Fri, 29 Oct 2010 23:20:00 GMT

jeff cook needs to be fired medal of honor is awsome this is the best game in the whole series by far a 7 are kiding me yes levels could have been bigger but then agian there are bigger levels but the fact that Jeff got his butt whopped on the game cuz he cant handel a realistic FPS doesnt mean we all should have to listen to him ive had the game for about a week now and im an addict for multiplayer and the fact that the story is by far the closest thing to whats really going on now in the world makes it fun to play and you get the feeling if they didnt change the name lol of our enemys there would be a big fuse over this game and make it more popular by the way over 250000 people playing tit already

Blog Post: Medal of Honor Review

Shane — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 23:21:00 GMT

I had kicked the idea around with my brother about what a shooter with the best elements of Battlefield and CoD would be like. I always wanted this since Cod4 & Bad Company took up so much of my time. I expected huge levels with vehicles and fast game play. Sadly this effort from dice is not what I had in mind. Don't get me wrong, I like this game. I just feel like Dice didn't live up to the potential. One example is combat mission. The 3 maps offered for this game mode are pretty nice. These are the rush style modes I wanted in CoD for so long. Except where are the frantic vehicular combat? I thought I signed up for Battlefield style vehicular crazyness with Cod fast game play. Single player is decent with a few memorable moments. Although on hard the game is ridiculously easy. I would of liked to see more unlockable guns and ranks. It would of been nice to have more maps out of the box and more vehicular combat. I was hoping being Tier 1 would feel like an accomplishment, now I'm just glad i can tame my shooter fix until Black ops.

File: Medal of Honor Clean Sweep Trailer

Matt Helgeson — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:53:00 GMT

Check out the new free DLC for EA's Medal of Honor

Blog Post: How low can the franchise go?

Warbuff — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 17:39:00 GMT

Rent Medal of Honor if...

You're an FPS junkie that doesn't have a fond remembrance of the franchise.
You enjoy FPS military multiplayer and want to give this game a try despite what reviewers say.

Buy Medal of Honor if...

You've played every Medal of Honor ever released and hold the older titles with high regard.

Medal of Honor is a franchise that has had heavy influence on the type of gamer I am. The games brought to life the battles and acts of heroism I was reading about in Steven Ambrose's books. I felt the exhilaration of liberating a nation, the pride of toppling an empire and openly wept at the thought of human beings sacrificing themselves for our liberties. The Medal of Honor series has deeper meaning to me than any other. Because of this I expect a lot from every game that is released under its flagship title. The expectation turned into hope as the years passed. Mindless dribble such as MOH: Heroes convinced me that EA looked at the Medal Of Honor name as just a label and not something worthy of too much effort.

It's 2010. Medal of Honor has been brought into the "modern" age. Electronic Arts spared no expense on an advertising blitz to make sure everyone and their mother knew this game was coming. What they failed to do, yet again, was focus on creating a unified experience that stirred emotion.

If I had to use one word to sum up my experience, it would be "underwhelming". The plot, characters, AI, environments, multiplayer, everything is lacking. Had this game been released 4 years ago I'd have a more forgiving perspective. As it stands everything Medal Of Honor presents to the player has been done better.

The campaign takes place among the mountains of Afghanistan. Bouncing between the narrative of Tier 1 operators and Army Rangers, the player gets to experience the heroism and tragedy of American Soldiers in today's war. Just like with MOH: Airborne I got the sense that EA felt a true to life war sim would be boring for the mass market. The setting, characters and weapons are all portrayed with startling realism. But the events that unfold have been injected with a Hollywood flare.

That injection may as well be a children's dose. The majority of my time with the game I was drowsy and considered turning off the console for a nap. The sneaking missions are the worst; and there are lots of them. You tailgate an AI buddy who moves from spot to spot without any tense moments. The one time I had to venture off on my own, my bearded overwatcher warned me of all impending danger; even if he couldn't see it.

When you aren't sneaking around mud huts at night you'll be engaged in fevered firefights. While the gunplay is satisfying, it's not terribly exciting or difficult. The Taliban don't maneuver like Russian Spetsnaz so everything feels like a turkey shoot. Even when you have to snipe or spot for artillery, pulling the left trigger automatically aims where you need to be looking. Pop out of cover, score some head shots and advance. Do that for 5 hours and you're done.

The story wrapped around the gameplay is shallow and predictable. Every Helicopter the player touches is shot out of the sky with an RPG. (no exaggeration) The characters are stone cold soldiers so even moments when comrades are bleeding to death are devoid of emotion. The only character I cared about was Sgt. Patterson; and that's because of Lt. Patterson from early on in the franchise.

One redeeming quality for the campaign is the attention to detail from Danger Close. Forcing players to use the light machine gun for actual support surprised me. The middle third of the campaign was the most exciting; being left for dead with dwindling ammo had me in suspense on whether or not I'd actually die. But everything ends just as mediocre as it started. In my opinion if the entire game were focused on the Army Rangers it could have been much more enjoyable.

After completing the campaign is when most players start losing track of time with the Multiplayer. Dice handled all the competitive aspects of Medal of Honor and they are the driving force behind the blockbuster Battlefield series. Needless to say everyone expected addictive game modes and AAA presentation.

Remember the word of the day is underwhelming. There could be any number of reason as to why DICE delivered such a short ended experience and I can't pretend to know which it is. All the game modes are team based so lone wolves need not apply. Standards such as Deathmatch, Point Control and Demolition are present. One unique game mode that had the most promise is Combat Mission.

For Combat mission the attackers must complete a series of story based objectives. This could be anything from securing a helicopter crash site to destroying an AA gun. Unfortunately this is just a narrative skin stretched over a linear point capture system. Attackers need only to stand near an objective while a progression bar on the HUD fills up. But this is minor compared the glaring issues of MP that make it almost unplayable.

Maps are tiny and, except for the 2 combat missions, are all square in shape. Lots of vantage points and lines of sight across the maps make sniping the most popular tactic. Spawning takes place in the corners of the map so it's easy to position yourself for cheap kills. Team work and coordination can overcome and win the day but steer clear if you're someone who stresses over their kill death ratio. Despite critics who haven't touched the game comparing it Modern Warfare, it plays incredibly different. (But not in a good way)

Player progression is laughable even compared to other DICE titles. There are 3 classes to choose from; two of which are almost identical. There are 15 levels per class and leveling up happens quickly. Sadly the unlocks aren't very exciting. (I can spawn with an enemy weapon... Sweet , I guess) Stat tracking only remembers the ribbons and medals you've earned so those aforementioned ratio obsessed won't have any proof for bragging rights.

Medal of Honor is a game that appeals to a small crowd of military FPS junkies; a group that I am a proud member. If it had to limbo under the bar set by previous titles it wouldn't even need to bend backwards. Save for a few missions the campaign is lackluster. The multiplayer feels rushed and has no lasting appeal. I'm still a fan of the Medal of Honor franchise. But EA is making it harder and harder for me to connect with the love I once had.

Blog Post: A little disappointing, but still a lot of fun.

saizarod — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 16:27:00 GMT

I have been waiting for Medal of Honor for a while now and when I got the final product I was a little disappointed.

Let's start with the Single player mode. I was confronted by a plethora of glitches that made the story mode very annoying. The first one isn't really a glitch but a poor gameplay decision made by Danger Close. You have to turn on your HUD. Which means you must constantly press the D-pad to see waypoints showing your next objective, This is especially annoying when you are trying to mark targets for close air support. Another problem I noticed is that when an A.I. ally kicks in the door, the game will forget to open that area up to the player I will still be blocked off from a building, resulting in a need to revert back to the last save to try again. Another problem is the health system. MOH uses the common red screen used by most FPS but sometimes I will take a dizzying amount of fire and only a small little splotch of blood will appear on my screen, thinking my health is still in good condition I will try to run between spots of cover and a stray bullet will hit me and I will die while my screen is from dark red. A very common and aggravating experience. My final qualm with the campaign is the lack of a good story. I commonly found myself wondering what my main objective was. I would find myself marking trucks for some unknown purpose or find myself on a mountain killing Taliban just for the heck of it. A simple goal or target mentioned in the cutscenes would have made the single player much more better than the shooting gallery that it was.

But enough about the negatives, let's talk about the good parts of the campaign. First off, the visual are great, some of the best in the business and the sound is also very well done. Controls are tight and MOH includes a feature that is one my favorite gameplay mechanics EVER. In this game you can run and when you press the crouch button you can slide foward. This is great for moving between points of cover and since the in game sprint is very slow it is great alternative for moving quickly. Also, the cutscenes in the single player are really great, while they don't tell you what you'll be doing in the upcoming level they are very emotional and do a great job of telling a soldiers story. And the Apache level in this game where you play as an Apache helicopter's gunner is incredibly fun. It reminds me of the AC-130 level in COD 4. I haven't seen another level like that in a while and it was a blast to return to this great kind of level.

MOH also boasts a very satisfying multiplayer component. Imagine COD without perks. Whether or not this sounds appealing is up to you. DICE made this multiplayer and it shows. DICE took Rush mode from BC 2 and put it into MOH and is definetly my favorite gametype. MOH also boats a great class customization feature. You can equip everything from an ACOG scope to damge increasing rounds. The gun attachments are also cool because the sights look different for each type of gun. For example the AK has a more shoddy looking scope, like something that meant for another gun (and no it doesn't affect gameplay) while the M16 has a more uniform factory made appearance. The inclusion of a medal and ribbon system makes rank progression fun. And score streaks a.k.a. kill streaks are challenging to get and are very rewarding. Although I feel DICE could have done more with the multiplayer since the classes are about the same with only a slight weapon difference. Far from BC 2's varied classes. Of course who can blame DICE for not wanting to make a very good military shooter multiplayer when the BC 2 Vietnam pack and Battlefield 3 are coming out? Who in their right mind would make themselves competition?

MOH was a little disappointing because I was hoping the campaign would not be as much as a shooting gallery as it turned out to be. But a very emotional story (the ending is very powerful), incredible graphics and sounds. and the awesome Apache level make up for the repetitive gameplay and annoying glitches. While the multiplayer may be intentionally watered down by DICE, the multiplayer is still fun and will find a very passionate fanbase.