Medal of Honor: Warfighter
Not Too Shabby
Medal of Honor (2010) was not as bad, to me, as people said. It had its charms and curses, but it held up. Then comes Medal of Honor: Warfighter. I was excited but slightly confused on everyone's reaction to it, but to each their own. I found the game to be a lot better than Medal of Honor (2010) and a much better story line. The game moved at a faster rate and the controls were fluid and almost real. I wouldn't sit around and replay it 4 or 5 times, but its worth replaying again.
IN ALL I WOULD GIVE THIS GAME A 8 OUT OF 10
ITS A GOOD GAME, IT HAS GOOD GRAPHICS BUT THE MULTIPLAYER NEEDS TO BE FIXED, GAMEPLAY IT IS GOOD, THE CAMPAIGN IS AWESOME , THE GRAPHICS IN THE CAMPAIGN ARE BEAST
Subpar EA game, however, somewhat appealing
I played this game, then played the first Medal of Honor for the PS3 afterwards and there were certain things I liked more about this game while there were certain aspects of the prequel that I found to be better. The Frostbyte 2 engine is good especially during cutscene movies, but there are some choppy parts during gameplay especially when looking long range. The scale is very impressive though. Personally, this felt like just another middle-eastern first person shooter which has plagued the gaming industry over the past half-decade but it did present some positive changes. One of these changes included the actual gameplay. It wasn't your traditional "point-and-shoot" games because it incorporated realistic shooting. Leading targets was key in the first mission along with some missions later on. Recoil felt more accurate than a Call of Duty game, which gave it bonus realism points compared to other first person shooters. The gameplay overall was pretty good, but the engine itself needs improvements such as being graphically smoother and fixing bugs which have been a part of EA games for years. This isn't one of the best shooters of all time, but it was a decent game that with some subtle improvements could lead to a very nice next-generation sequel.
A Recent/Honest Review
Medal of Honor Warfighter is the sequel to Danger Close's Medal of Honor (2010) a reboot of the Medal of Honor Series written my Steven Spielberg and is a very good game. Now I've read all the reviews. The good ones and the bad ones and what I have to say is this. All those who gave this game 10, 9, or even an 8 are overselling it. 6 or 7 is probably the most accurate rating because it's not perfect. The real reason i'm giving this a 7 is because EA has discontinued it (i hate them for that) and the fan base is unfortunately smaller than COD and BF mainly because those who have gave it critical reviews played it on the first month or so of the release. The game at first was rushed and unfinished so you got a rush and unfinished game which in-turn gave a glitchy feeling to the game because it happened. After a couple months or so with some updates it's all better now. Heck I don't have any connection issues with this game vs. BO2. I bought BO2 three months ago and everytime I'm on it i have connection issues (i have xfinity high speed internet so my internet is not bad). The Campaign tries to make you feel some kind of "pity" for the character preacher for he is having troubles with his life at home. Somewhat realistic if you ask me but the execution is poor. I thought the campaign was both intense (at some points) but boring in a lot. 3-4 hours i was done. But if you're like me you don't by a FPS game with a multiplayer just for the campaign you're in it for the multiplayer. The multiplayer is excellent. Great gun customization. great graphics (especially for a multiplayer), great classes, and great pace. Although the Frostbite 2 engine is restricted you won't spend your time blowing stuff up. Most things that you'd think would be breakable are so. 12v12 TDM is fun as well with a good size maps which are bland for some of them but still good. The lasting appeal is not very good though. I still play this game but not as much as I used to (i'd like to note i bought Star Wars the Old Republic. an MMO, and i've been engulfed in such) yet when i do play i have massive fun. If you want a comparison towards COD or BF your not going to get one and if you do make one it's going to be a bad review because the game is not COD or BF it's Medal of Honor. It leans more BF but that's because EA created both games (well actually Dice did BF danger close did MOH but you know what i mean) and it's very ignorant to judge this against those games. Now because it's 30 dollars i'd go buy it if you have the extra money because you'll be getting a Triple A title for 30 bucks and that's a great deal (not to mention you get the DLC with it) but if you're a COD player or a hardcore BF player then don't get it and put a bad name on it because the game is not for you.
MoH IS STILL GOING STRONG! RESPECT TROOPS!
I HAD THIS GAME SINCE RELESE AND THESE PASS 2 MoH GAMES HAVE BEEN GREAT. IT HAS MADE ME GROW MORE APPRECIATIVE FOR OUR COUNTRY'S OPERATORS. THE HAS JUST THE RIGHT MIX OF DIFFICULTY AND SATISFACTION. IN MY OPINION THIS GAME IS BETTER THAN BOTH BATTLEFIELD AND CoD
The Definition of Mediocrity
My favorite genre is the shooting genre. I enjoy third-person and first-person shooters immensely. There are a lot of bad shooters out there like Inversion and Blacksite Area 51; but I think Warfighter has to be the worst one I've ever played. Everything about this game is flawed. Whether it's the story, the gun play, the cover system, and it's selling point, the breaching. Everything has something worth complaining about. And believe me, I'll be doing that a lot in this review. It has an extremely bear bones story. You can't get any more generic. Special forces, called Tier 1, are out finding a terrorist names Hassan. That's it... There are thirteen missions in the game, but a lot of them are very random. One mission required me to snipe a terrorist who was boarding a civilian boat. Me and my fellow soldiers set up for a sync shot, I fired, there was a Sniper Ghost Warrior like slow motion bullet cam, and the mission is over. It took three minutes. That's the shortest mission I have ever seen in any game. The game is very short. It'll take you 3-4 hours to finish the campaign.
The game can't even copy games properly. They had a Killzone like cover system, and it's awful. The game will force you to use it sometimes, too. The game does this by not letting you go prone. When this happens, you have to use the worthless cover system, and when you do use it, you'll still end up getting shot, resulting in cheap deaths. The cover system is extremely pointless. When the prone does work, you'll notice that it has the exact same animation as Battlefield 3. And I mean the exact same! The game tries to be Call of Duty with its over abundance of breaching (which I will get to soon), and set-piece moments. The levels are extremely linear, you won't be driving tanks and airplanes like Battlefield, but you do get to drive a car and boat, but it's still very linear then, too.
The level design is very uninspired. You'll fight in jungles, the Middle east, and on boats. There isn't really anything new about it. When I drove the boat, I somehow sank into the water, and out of the game world. Everyone was pretty calm about it too. It took the game five or so minutes to realize that something wasn't right and restarted back to the checkpoint.
The characters are dull and motionless. The weapons feel terrible to fire. The sniping missions are the worst.... You get a tomahawk weapon for melee. Every time you do it, it goes into a Killzone like cut-scene. Some of them involve me slashing a dudes face with it. Or hitting the dude in his family jewels. Some these are pretty fun to do (especially the last one), but, unfortunately, it takes too long to accomplish. By the time it ends, you'll be near death. So using melee isn't the best choice...
There is nothing to collect in the levels, adding no replayability. The only this they do have is a lot of breaching options. Some of these include shooting the door knob with a shotgun, kicking the door down, or blowing it up in different fashions. You unlock new breaching "abilities" by getting headshots during a breach. Once you get four headshots, you unlock a new breach. These are kind of fun to try out, but you'll get all them once the game ends. You have to break through A LOT of doors in this game.
All in all, I did not enjoy this game. As a fan of shooters, this is kind of pathetic. In this day and age, we shouldn't be getting games like this. It's an embarrassment, and a shame to the Medal of Honor license. I recommend not wasting your time on it..
Characters: Thumbs Down
Story: Thumbs Down
Level Design: Thumbs Down
Weapons: Thumbs Down
I was reading a lot of reviews for this game after i got it, that made it look like it was the single worst game ever created. i, however, thought that this game was better than all of the call of dutys combined. this game had great graphics, great gameplay, and great missions. this game is so much better than COD, because the online from COD 4, to MW3 is exactly the same, with the ecxeption of different maps, and guns. Think about it, the online is the same for all games. and the online for B OPS ! was awful. the graphics were terrible, and the gameplay was terrible, even when your playing on a 65 inch plasma 3D TV, it was still terrible. getting back on track, MOH is a great all around game, and would highly reccomend it.
The sequel to Medal of Honor not only fails to come to par, but is worse than the original. I honestly am overwhelmed at how bad this game is.
The storyline, based on actually events or not, is horrible. It's just bad, it's boring, and it's slow.
The gameplay is one of the anchors of this ship; significantly worse than the last and not nearly as good as it could have been. 'Chase' missions, if you will, literally wait for you to catch up to the person your chasing before they continue forward. Realistic?
Most of the weapons are pulled/copied & pasted from the last MOD or Battlefield 3. Very disappointing
I won't even go into graphics or sound as they are not worth talking about and they too were pulled from their predecessors. I gave graphics a '3' purely as mercy points.
I'll tie lasting appeal and multiplayer together. From what I remember, multiplayer was anything but impressive. I can no longer access multiplayer due to some update that I can't find and EA's customer support is as much of a joke as this game.
For the people giving this game a 9/10 or 10/10, please grow up. This game in the absence of all other shooters is a "3" at best. Even the professional reviews said this game was junk. Look some of the big ones up if you don’t believe me. Don't buy it. Call of Duty is better, so is Battlefield 3; both excellent games.
This game is, without a doubt, underrated. The storyline is brilliant (that might be an understatement), the gameplay is great, the graphics are awesome, (I never really knew how to rate the sounds but everything seems to be aligned just fine), and the lasting appeal...omg; I started a new campaign RIGHT AFTER I beat it. Yes, others have stated that this is an awful game. And because of that, I almost didn't buy this game. But I thought to myself: "Hey, games are like movies. Not everyone likes the same movie."
this game was the best game I played since battlefield 3 . it was way better than the 2010 medal of honor . the are way better and support actions. why does game informer give this 5/10 its at least worth 9/10.