Yeah, your review is terrible. If you don't understand why, maybe you shouldn't write reviews.

First off let me start by saying this game is awesome. I have no idea how these review sites game this game a bad review. It actually boggles my mind. The visuals were great, the gameplay was tight and clean andhas a cover system, which i have been waiting for in all these fps games. Killzone and Crysis 2 has one. The campaign was good. Not great. Just short. It's the kind of campaign you need to pay attention too. Even the chatter helps you make sense of what's going on in the game also. If you don't listen you get kind of lost. I actually had a better time with the BF3 campaign the second time through because i was actually listening to everything that was being said as if i was there. The multiplayer is chaotic and fun. I love the fact that you use gear that the actual tier 1 operators would use from their respective countries. This game is a great great game. Don't hop on this bash MoH band wagon people. I have the game on PC and i love it. I am going to head through the campaign again. The visuals are so awesome it's ridiculous. There is a few glitches here and there but come on, all games have some glitches. I am a avid FPS player and a hardcore gamer. I am critical in my game reviewing and also fair. The fps genre is my favorite one and i believe that his game can stand proudly amongst all the games out now and that have come before it. I am not a MoH fanboy or CoD or Halo or whatever. The truth is i love good games. I bought a ps3 just to open up options and get in on those great games i was missing out on like Killzone and Resistance trilogies. I say all this so you know that i'm not just some dude ranting about the first fps he's ever played. Bottom line is this game is great and all these reviewers that marked it less then an 8 need to pull there head out of their a$$'s I think that these companies need to hire new reviewers to be honest. It's funny that all these bad reviews come in right before black ops 2 comes out.

I will never understand how your review is two lines long, does it really mater what GI or any other reviewer thinks about a game you like? As long as you like it thats all that matters.

I agree with you on this. It's almost as if they choose not to support it due to what they get out of COD and BF. I don't know if it comes down to sponsors or something evolving money. Either way, I thought the game informer review was a bunch of trash. Along with this one being a trash review from game informer, so was the the GI halo 4 review. The guy who did the review can hardly even play the game lol. After watching the video on there, I can only think... Why are the putting someone who is not familiar for FPS shooters as a key reviewer? Same goes for this. As one who is n the military, I really think this game takes a serious step in the right direction. If you don't work with your fire team member on multiplayer... You will probably get smashed. But if you do work with them, it raises some great advantages. The single player was outstanding. This guy knocks the vehicle scene? The chapters involving the vehicles where actually very well put together, and the story was nice as well. I really don't understand these key reviewers for some of these games. Some knock off games get a 9.5, while games like this that actually get rated around a 7/10 by the community get trashed. This is a good game and is great for certain personality types. It's competitive and requires teamwork to maximize the experience. The key reviewer that did this for GI needs to open his eyes and realize that his review is on the low side compared to the majority of other players. The craziest thing is... The more you play this game, the more you will like it. MOH warfighter just keeps getting better and better as it goes. Good on them and screw reviewers like this GI guy who looks like they are trying to tamper with the sale of this product.

I have yet to play the single player but i keep hearing really fun things about it. the multiplayer on the other hand is excellent and a ton of fun. more fun when working together, which is still lacking in the online community. (maybe players feel embarrassed to talk to strangers or think they will make a mistake or even get yelled at. whatever the case it's disappointing because working as a team is so much more fun and you gain so much more of an advantage when doing so.) but the overall expansive and close quarter feel is great. someone i was playing with exemplified it to a great cross between battlefield 3 and call of duty. too bad that EA does not put it up as a demo for both single and multiplayer online so more persons could get a feel for it and bypass the online reviews. i'd love to see a demo with multiplayer on any game give you an hr or 2 max with the online community and include all your accomplishments, if you purchase the game so you don't have to start off back to square one. :)

Solid.

The title of the article is offensive and the reviewer fails to highlight some great features in this game. I urge the community to read these posts by the players.

I agree with ripnshtup regarding the campaign. It's a bit hard to follow the first time through (similar to BF3). That doesn't necessarily mean that the plot is weak. It includes some fairly stunning visuals (particularly the first level) and scripted events. Half the operatives have bushy beards so if you're not paying close attention it can be quite confusing from a lack of visual differentiation (lol).

The reviewer's remark about getting pushed out from cover because AI script may be true--though i didn't encounter it--but... the same thing happened to me in Black Ops II. Harper pushed me from cover getting me killed by patrolling drones (in a flooded map, like a map from THIS game except even more linear). But I'm sure they don't mention AI hiccups in the Black Ops review. Treyarch assuredly has a bigger budget so it should be even less acceptable for them. Overall it seems silly to judge the quality of this game based on that flaw because the it is still common in all modern AAA titles.

The cheeky comment about the training mission being "ripped from CoD4" is unnecessary. It's not the first time it's been done...granted. But was it really any more creative the first time around? At least in this one you're a spy doing it within a terrorist organization. That same mission also familiarizes you with the hybrid sight and lean controls among others--it was necessary to learn this outside of a real combat situation and training grounds are where that learning would happen. It made sense.

The reviewer must have been high to think the MP is anything but great.

He was correct about the protected spawn zone being maybe a little too close to the bomb sites in the "Combat Mission" aka Rush game mode. It doesn't, however, ruin that game mode. The flag mode he mentioned is nothing to rave about, although it's a matter of opinion.

Reviewer says hybrid optic is the "only redeeming feature" but fails to mention that it is "ripped", this time from MW3. This mechanic is not new although in my opinion it's executed better in this game. In addition to a scope on a swivel like in MW3, they also utilize real life 45 degree rails and also ironsights integrated onto sniper scopes (in SP, haven't unlocked any yet in MP not sure if they're included there).

The vault, like from BF3, works pretty well. I encountered minimal "invisible barriers" like the reviewer complains about, though I wasn't trying to vault over everything I came upon. I can think of maybe 1 or 2 spots in MP maps where I'd like to vault and I cannot, will probs be patched.

Bipods from BF3 are back with two important distinctions, when deployed you lose your minimap(at least for gunner class, not sure about sniper). A teammate or fireteam partner needs to watch your back while you completely suppress a quadrant. It can be crushing since maps are pretty small with pathways similar to CoD titles. To facilitate your function as a base of fire, clip sizes are infinite when deployed but use an overheating mechanic where an animation shows the belt compartment opened to aid cooling the gun when fired too much.
Some people may deem all this as unfair, but when EVERY SINGLE class has a support call-in that drops smoke mortar rounds it's hardly impossible to overcome. In my experience, most people don't bother using bipods anyways since they prefer mobility (on xbox 360 at least). Seeing as this and the next topic were left out of review article i will assume the reviewer is one of those people.

Lean mechanic has finally made a comeback and is executed pretty dang well. Can actually be useful but will limit mobility a bit (balanced).

Knee-slide. Simple but excellent, and probably my favorite feature. Sprint to crouch is fluid and gets you down behind cover quickly. It can also be used to slide across a corridor choke point so you don't die. Not nearly as clunky as the dive in CoD because it doesn't slow you down tons when you try to stand up afterwards. In addition to the CoD dive, I know crysis 2 had a baseball slide (a bit different), and MoH 2010 had knee-slide but only in SP (also Danger Close). My point here is again, maybe not the most original mechanic but probably the best execution of it that I've seen. Since you can fire your weapon during a slide, combat is VERY fast paced and hectic (on par with CoD).

MoH:WF took the partner system from CoJ: The Cartel's cops vs. hoodlum MP and made it fun, active, and more practical. HP regen is very slow unless you or your partner go up to the other one and heal/replenish ammo for which a few points are awarded. Grenades don't resupply from this so people can't 'nade spam. The game devs obviously gave it some important thought.

I also encountered no problems with hit detection in SP or MP. Not sure why reviewer did. Often times as few as 4 pistol rounds kill people w/ full HP, making sidearms actually a viable weapon unlike a lot of FPSs where they're really underpowered and imbalanced. For that matter all weapons are pretty balanced, unlike the last MoH where sniper rifles were an issue (DICE's doing).

The single largest feature added to MoH:WF is the ability to represent your nation. Earn tokens for playing (more for winning). At day's end, log on to battlelog/MoHWF and submit tokens to contribute to the cause of your country on the leaderboard of nations! The more days in a row you submit, a higher multiplier is applied to tokens earned the next day. You get some additional XP too. The failure of the review to cover this topic means the reviewer altogether missed the point of the semi-competetive scene on the national level being brought to the general public. It's a NEW and INTERESTING notion for FPSs. I mean come on GI, you're looking for creativity, right? And you skip this?

Customization of your classes to represent various elite soldiers all over the world is pretty cool. The reviewer speaks the truth that the interface for selecting and customizing your gun and soldiers is a bit tough to figure out at first since it's kind of dense with options. BUT if you stick with it and get past the sensory overload (particularly the gun and soldier models in the background), you will find it fun and rewarding to level up and unlock new character models, weapon skins, and attachments.

How does this review get published by one of the big names in games and reviews? It's about as "fair and balanced" as... well, other sources of media.

I apologize for the long winded post but as you can see there is CLEARLY a lot more depth to MP than was revealed in the article. I just provided a lot of information on it, and I am still learning.
Once you get over the whole "THAT game did it first" attitude, this is a very well polished and entertaining experience. Don't take my word for it, and certainly don't take GI's...
Please make your mind up for yourself!!!

To me this was a great game. I dont understand how it got a lower rating than the last one. Graphicly imporved, storyline I thought was deep and intersesting and the multiplayer was vastly improved from the first one. Its an overall well balanced game. They worked with Navy Seal, weapons and attatchment developers. These are people who take the time to make this game and want the players to have a great experience. But in the end the only things pointed out are its flaws? Thats not a review at all. I hope the MoH franchise keeps doing what its doing and puts out more great games like Warfighter

Ok, so to all of you people that left comments on this 3 sentence 'review' that is quite possibly one the shortest non-reviews I've ever seen; you really need to take these comments and post them as reviews of your own. So many of you posted comments that are actually reviews under a review that is actually a comment. Copy and paste these things into your own reviews. There are only 2 user reviews because everyone posted their reviews as comments in this horrible review.

to short hate the reveiw tell us what you thought about it