Medal of Honor: Warfighter Review | The Controller Online

The Controller Online writes:

"When your game is directly competing for the attention of Call of Duty and Battlefield’s fans, you need to create a high quality First-Person Shooter that gives gamers something different to draw their attention away from the competition. With Medal of Honor Warfighter, Danger Close may have failed in their attempt to create a unique shooter experience, but it’s not quite as bad as you may have heard and it doesn't mean that it’s not worth playing."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
finite2088d ago

finally a score that this game deserves, and a review i agree with nice work.

BoneIdle2088d ago

Fair review. Well done.

jmc88882088d ago

Yep a fair review. I think it's still better than that, but I can't knock a 7/10 score because that is fair.

It just is crazy you have people like IGN give Ravaged a 67 but MoH a 40.

You can't even play a map besides Ravaged demo version because only like 30 or so people play, and 24 of those are on the one same map demo version. Crappy controls. Graphics that look like something around like early Source HL2 graphics plus a couple of things a little better. No unlockables or rank ups. No single player of any kind.

Overall Ravaged has a 72 on metacritic and MoH 58.

So yeah, the spawn system where you can't spawn if in trouble is a great feature, and it doesn't always spawn you facing the same direction, so the guys coming up behind get two easy kills if they see you spawn and your teammate is laying down the other way. Not always, but it'll do that.

The multiplayer is fun, and it's crazy how much people are blaming MoH for problems found in other military fps that they let get away with. I mean why is a problem on MoH scored negatively but it skates past on BF3 or CoD? I think all three are fun, but if you're going to knock them down, knock them down equally. I feel the reviewers of MoH around the net has just been horrible. Forget about the innovations, and instead just talk about similar problems all the major shooters have and crucify MoH solely for the industry's problems. Then say, well it isn't something completely different on one hand, while others saying it isn't like BF3 on the other.

It's just been insane how many people got the wrong message about this good multiplayer game and either hated on it from an individual level because of it, or reviewed it badly professionally.

Now if they go out and score CoD BLOPS2 high it's just going to be downright stupid. Not after what they pulled with MoH. If it's a new standard, apply it equally.

Meanwhile I'll have fun with all three major ones, plus Halo 4.

Ju2088d ago (Edited 2088d ago )

The good thing is, that we have quite a fair amount of people who play or have played the game and do not agree with the low score. This review seems to be fair and I agree with the score (I would actually give it a little bit more, I like the game). Gives you something to think what's going on in this "industry" - even if this are just kids speaking their mouth. IGN and GT aren't kids, though.