on 10 February 2011
[quote]too many buildings and cover its not properly structured like most games go as soon as the game starts snipers camp and that`s it, you wont see where they are because there is no kill cam plus if you try to cross the map to hunt them down you wont even go half way before you dead[/quote]
So it pretty much paints the real feel of what it is like on the battlefield then?.
Grow a pair soldier and stop being so negative.
I was open minded of the multi player side with hearing so much of this negativity?although it is not all that bad.I feel the map`s give you a good urban of street to street fighting and the open map`s give you a good feel of having to keep your head down and use cover.
People nowa day`s are COD brain washed,if you can not get a camera to tell you were your enemy was or is?then it`s a poor game?.
I found this game to be really fun to play on and off line.OK the story is short although what you get is none stop action all the way,the part were you are cut off and the tali ban are swarming you from the hills was pure adrenaline pleasure.
The only negative for me is I find the AI to be a little slow on reaction time to your movements.Even on the hard setting the AI were to easy.
on 5 February 2011
I'm not going to sit and compare this game to others that are similar and I will also keep this review short as most of the other reviews have already provided detailed descriptions of the game.
This game is great and I thoroughly enjoyed playing it and was sad when I completed it! It kept you interested by there being different weapons and ways of taking people out (e.g. setting target for air attacks) so that you weren't just aiming and shooting the same way for the entire game. The graphics were very good as well and I got into the storyline. Was especially pleased that the Amazon price was good. It's ridiculous what some people pay for games these days.
An excellent game in it's own right. Why does everything have to be compared to Call of Duty or Halo these days!? There are still other good games out there!
on 27 April 2011
Contrary to what a few people have been saying, this game's multiplayer is not at a par with Black Ops, nor worse than MW2, but a hell of a lot better.
It's a lot more realistic in many respects, and for once you actually snipe properly due to the absence of Killcams. The realism of this game the first time I played it was just brilliant, and the graphics beat Modern Warfare 2 by a mile.
The storyline is amazing and great fun, and the multiplayer is brilliant and (most importantly) not full of little 9-13 year old childish squeaky little kids who never shut up.
This is why I recommend this game to any FPS fan.
on 26 January 2011
Orginally passed on buying this game, bought black ops instead, was very disappointed with that.
Played medal of honour at a friend, was very impressed with it online, immediately made the purchase and I havnt played black ops since.
This is much more like real urban warfare and I would recommend it to anyone over black ops.
The way that you earn skill and the way that it matches you with players of similar skill is an excellent idea and constantly keeps you on your toes.
on 26 December 2010
Call me old fashioned but I play this type of game "old school". By that I mean I don't connect my Xbox to the internet or play online so that some halfwit out there in cyberspace can verbally abuse me every time I fancy shooting some baddies. Maybe this game really takes off if you're online but as a FPS playing in an old school stylee it's disappointing. The graphics, control, weapons and effects are all pretty good and in keeping with it's competition but the game is over before you've had chance to really get involved. I think it took about 4-5 hours from first sitting down with it to seeing the credits roll and for the price I find that pretty disgraceful. Developers of these things shouldn't blindly assume that everybody is going to hook it up to the internet to get the best from it - if you're forking out the rather extortionate money they ask for then you should have a great gaming experience whether it's online or standalone. Three stars for the enjoyment while it lasted!
on 18 January 2011
I am guessing that people who review this game have not been playing online . because online is superb . probably not as good as Call of duty 4 and MW2 but on a par or better than than black ops which was a let down . I am glad i rented blackops and this but i went out and bought this . The single player feels added on just for people who dont have xbox live but it shines online . Be it a sector control , team deathmatches that are really cool , or missions which are basiclly battlefield bad company missions exploding the other teams [which consists of online players not Ai] area and moving to the next untill all 5 sections have been destroyed and you have pushed all the way , then its time to defend and hold them off . GREAT FUN . I dont understand how everyone loves battlefield but slates this when it basicly is battlefield but more shooting and less running around looking for the action . Just buy it if u love battlefield and enjoy call of dutys and other fps . And the sniping is good fun and the feeling of being under supressive fire and keeping behind cover works well . u feel like your there and u can not say that about call of duty . I challenge any true FPS fan who enjoys battlefield and who can do more than just run and gun to take on this game . You will see how good it is .And if you still think its bad then for the price its at now just trade it in to your local game shop . I bet you will make your money back. the xbox live community needs to get behind this game more so it can live for a long time because Its a PROPER ONLINE SHOOTER THATS NOT FOR KIDDIES
I think theres a conspiracy to slam other great shooters so call of duty dominates the market even when it doesnt deserve too . But as for EA . Well the havent helped themselves .1 they are EA :( 2 VIP passes suck 3 good games are suffering from EA being greedy :(
PS ........... when i rented I still got to play most of the game online with out VIP code . After using a VIP code I was actually disapointed at how little extra I got so if YOU SEE IT DIRT CHEAP SECOND HAND THEN ITS STILL WORTH IT :) And whats with Ea making us all pay for VIP codes but then still charging for download content . EA NEED TO SORT THEMSELVES OUT . MAY BE THEY SHOULD NOT MAKE SO MANY BAD GAMES AND EARN CASH THE PROPER WAY THROUGH GOOD SALES OF GOOD GAMES . I MEAN WHO TEST PLAYS THERE GAMES eg Need for speed undercover OUCH!!!!!!!!!!!
on 21 September 2012
I played this because I've only recently got an Xbox 360 and I'm working my way through what all my friends have going on about for the last half decade or so, so dont consider me an expert on Xbox 360 games as up till recently I was more ps2/PC gamer. FPS wise I've played Halo 3/reach, Bulletstorm and Ghost Recon : Future soldier and finished the campaigns but I must say this one, however brief had some of my favorite experiences of xbox 360 FPS's so far.
*Good Graphics, not amazing, but good enough to be immersible.
*Gameplay feels solid, probably the best FPS I've played for pure game play on the Xbox.
*Characters seem acceptably real, no oscars given out but you can enjoy it, if only because the Delta remind you of will smiths Ex-delta mates from towards the end of Bad Boys 2, and the SEALS all are trying to be like Eric Banas Delta force character from Black hawk down.
*some genuinly tense moments of combat (although this was on a HD tv with 5.1 surround sound very loud)
*Diversity of playing styles (from stealthy search & destroy missions with the SEALS or Delta, to a more general infantry role as a ranger, which actually is actually really well placed because it brings you back from thinking your indestructible.
*the sort of campaign where linearity can be excused because of explainable plot.
*Music is annoying when its trying to capture the moment, although It can be turned off thank god.
*If your required to pull back towards a chopper with your team dont think you can help your mates hold the evil lads back, the other team members just nag you.
*some very late explanations of controls
*Very short campaign, maybe 4 or 5 hours at most (very disappointing for someone like me whose used to 3 week PS1 Final Fantasy binges)
Summary this game as some really intense moments (particularly as the rangers, you really feel like your in the meat grinder) that I believe lift it out of the run of the mill shooter category, it was just a shame it ended so abruptly, A real experience could of been crafted from this if it was a few days long to complete, it seems single player is just a gimmick, given way to multiplayer and its a shame as I believe I'd rather be taken on a journey with my character than get called a noob, or later on just a general (any swear word) by some 14 year old.
on 24 August 2011
For the most part I like to think I have a good radar for the quality of games and films etc. however, every now and then it goes a little wrong. Coming up to its release I expected the MoH reboot to be fantastic, it had after all followed CoD 4's model so closely that you'd be forgiven for thinking they were the same game. So despite my dislike for the copying I looked forward to this game. Sadly Medal of Honour is singly one of the dullest, least engaging games I have ever played.
Now set in the modern day, the game is set in the Afghanistan conflict. Your enemies are the Taliban and your goal is to take them out, simple as. With no specific story arc other than a detached power struggle between a colonel in the field and a general back in America, the whole experience feels like samey battle after samey battle. This isn't helped by the characters having no personality, no distinct appearance and the environments all being rocky, sandy Middle Eastern towns and deserts. Genuinely every level felt exactly the same with the exception of the utterly ridiculous helicopter mission that had no link to anything else.
The story splits you between four characters, a marine on the ground, a chopper pilot and two tier one operatives. I didn't get was why there were two tier one guys, they both experience almost exactly the same missions, as does the marine really, and one of them is only in like two missions. To give an example of how uninvolving the missions are I'm gonna give an example, it's a minor spoiler but honestly you won't care. In the first marine mission your platoon gets ambushed. You then decide that the best way to deal with this is for you, a radio guy, your CO and another marine to head deep into enemy territory, God knows why. First of all the characters all looked the same and the dialogue was obscured by the fighting so badly that I didn't know which one had which name, I genuinely thought my name was Hernandez Anderson Patterson. Anyway, at the end of the mission you're at a hut in the middle of nowhere with Taliban coming from every direction, ammunition is running low and the cover is being destroyed. All seems lost. The game tries to make it seem epic and tense as you face death but it doesn't work, the soldiers have only just been introduced and have no personality and it's only like an hour into the game. As such I felt nothing. The endgame is equally as bland, just making me angry that the game was so short.
It also not like the multiplayer pushes any boundaries so there's no lasting appeal there. I know I've already said this but, it's just trying too hard to be CoD.
From a gameplay standpoint it's at least functional, control scheme taken almost button for button from CoD. Even with the injection of quad-biking, sniping from range and calling in air support, the game lacked variety. You spend most of the game shooting from behind rocks. It also lacks the variety of weapons; flash bangs are noticeably absent and grenades are super rare, having very little effect when present, guns all feel the same and are all applied in exactly the same way. That's not to say it's all bad. The knife animation actually looks like a stab rather than a random swipe, two guns plus a pistol is nice, there's an alt-fire on several guns and the return of a lean and the addition of the FarCry2 inspired slide to cover are nice touches. There's also the ability to take ammo from teammates though it's rarely necessary.
I get what MoH was going for, it was trying to pay homage to the hard work the allied soldiers do for our countries, an idea CoD has somewhat forgotten about in recent instalments, but where the CoD's always balanced this with fun varied gameplay, MoH sacrificed it.
The Final Word: Sadly just a disappointment all round, only worth buying if you need your military shooter fix and don't care where it comes from.
on 15 July 2011
I'm a huge fan of FPS's and MOH is a welcome addition to the large collection I already own. The Campaign is long compared to alot of shooters on the market atm and the graphics are fantastic. There are a few glitches but these are easily drowned out in what has to be one of the best looking games of 2010 and even currently. The gameplay is varied and exciting and the sound realistic and crisp. This combination provides an excellent platform with some truly exhilarating moments. As another reviewer has mentioned the scene where you are under siege by waves of Taliban sprinting from the surrounding mountains is thrilling and the level after while manning the weapons of the awesome AH-64 Apache is fantastic fun. There are a number of highlight moments that make this game stick out alongside other greats in the genre. It also has replayability with additional difficulties unlocked upon completion and a cool time attack version of the entire campaign on offer. This envolves starting a level with say 30 seconds on the clock, the only goal being to complete it before it ticks down to zero. Ofcourse the levels are generally very lengthy so to stop that timer ever reaching zero additional time is added for every kill with bonuses on offer for performing headshots and multikills with grenades etc. Getting 10 minutes into a particularly difficult section of the game and hovering around 5-20 seconds while desperatly running to look for that next headshot can really get your adrenaline pumping.
The multiplayer is also fairly good and Dice have carried over some of the best and worst bits from their battlefield titles. The weaponry and sounds of battle are second to none. The maps are normally breathtaking, beautifully made and like battlefield, huge! This type of large map however, does seem to attract an awful lot of 1 shot 1 kill snipers who can really become boring. There are some smaller maps which can provide the same sort of running and gunning that Cod titles offer but these maps can have incredibly obvious choke points that whole teams tend to sit and watch through their sights. The amount of this style of 'tactic' quickly becomes tedious for those that prefer to speed round guns blazing. Unfortunately, opening fire like that on this game generally invites a bullet to the head from a sniper on the other side of the map whose legs have gone to sleep and on quite a few occasions entire teams have become trapped in a tiny spawn point on the map with the only exit or exits blocked by the opposing team of snipers. The ranking system and other MP treats such as killstreak rewards aren't quite as good as the likes of MW2 but when a strafing jet or artillery strike does get called in the resulting explosions are a real delight to sit back and watch. The multiplayer definitely requires a gamer with a certain amount of skill and on occasion alot of patience but overall, the mix of gameplay from the campaign and multiplayer, realism, and beautiful graphics make any shortcomings a small problem in an otherwise entertaining offering. Definitely worth a look for the current pricetag and a must for all fans of FPS's. Happy gaming!
on 17 March 2011
`Call of Duty'. There, I got it out of the way. `Medal of Honor', is the latest in the long running series and has more than a little in common with the sales behemoth simply known as `CoD'. EA have ditched the well worn World War 2 setting in favour of a modern conflict. This is no bad thing as WW2 games have been around for years and feel very samey. However, out with the WW2 bathwater also goes the gameplay baby of `MoH: Airborne', the most recent and best in the series for a long time. `Airborne' featured players parachuting in on a contained map and tackling a series of objectives in the order they feel best. What does `MoH' replace this with? Boring linear levels all set in different shades of sandy location or snowy location.
I have to admit to not being the biggest fan of `CoD', so a poor rip off of that game is never going to sit well with me. The shooting in `MoH' is decent enough and the various weapons on offer are good. However, the story and level design is mind numbingly dull. Go there, shoot them, move there, shoot that - rinse and repeat. This is bad enough in the `CoD' games, but at least they have the know how to mix levels up and feature epic set pieces. `MoH' just feels like one almighty slog to make your way through the game. The storyline may be interesting to some, but I found it the same old sub standard Tom Clancy nonsense that has dominated the genre for years.
As well as a lacklustre single player game, there is a multiplayer mode that gives second hand buyers the privilege of paying for. You do get a weeks trial of the game before you need to buy, or use the token found in the box. I bought this game new, played online and didn't bother to use the code - some "lucky" 2nd hand user can have it. The gameplay was the same frustrating die every 5 seconds deathmatch of `CoD', but will duller matches and fewer players.
If you are going to go up against something like `CoD' at least try to do something different like `Battlefield Bad Company 2'. Don't just copy it and produce a faded facsimile.