Medal of Honor: Warfighter Review | EDGE

EDGE: "While another six months in development wouldn’t have removed the lingering bad taste from one of the more tasteless marketing campaigns in recent memory – including tie-ins with the real-world manufacturers who make the in-game ordnance, and a branded tomahawk that was later removed from sale – it would have done much to help smooth out the kinks in a game where at least the multiplayer has genuine potential. Instead, what’s shipped is rushed, uninspired and cynical."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
MakiManPR1939d ago

Too bad LP were involved in this game.

JellyJelly1939d ago

Why? They suck even more than the game so I think they make a perfect match.

LOGICWINS1939d ago

LOL, I doubt its THAT bad.

HammadTheBeast1938d ago

It isn't. I wouldn't call it great, but it's no this bad. Edge just goes overboard with the bandwagon and their scores make them feel special.

WilliamH1939d ago

Edge do tend to go a little crazy with their scores sometimes, that;s what gives them their edge /s

TheDopeFiend1939d ago (Edited 1939d ago )

It really isn't that bad of a game, it's just more of the same really, that shouldn't lower the overall score by that much, I would give it a 5 or a 6 at least.

The problem it has is it brings absolutely nothing new

Hopefully they'll go back to making WWW1/2 games after this

Emilio_Estevez1939d ago

I would truly love for them to back to WW1/2, I would buy it in a heartbeat. Frostbite 2 with destruction and all those classic guns!

IIC0mPLeXII1939d ago

This game got blasted. Looks like another game joins the ranks of Ninja Gaiden 3 And Op Raccoon City

venom061939d ago

please read this regarding this reviewer!!

Trunkz Jr1939d ago (Edited 1939d ago )

It's true, the Buddy system is awesome. I usually stick to Teamplay games like Battlefield but this game actually has Teamwork, wtf why hasn't CoD managed to add something unique like this? Not that I would jump to CoD because of that but CoD is on its 5th title I think since CoD4 and they never managed to come up with such a neat idea, they just repackage the same old crap and sell it.

dontbhatin1939d ago

Somebody needs to post this on N4G

Th3 Chr0nic1939d ago

WOW finally someone that understands!!!!. this needs to be plastered everywhere.

he hits it on the head so hard that it explodes in a gory gibfest of awesome writing!!!

InTheLab1939d ago (Edited 1939d ago )

"Medal of Honor’s Battlefield 3 style sound and shooting mechanics are much more satisfying, and ooze authenticity much more so than Call of Duty."

"Second to that, the much newer Frostbite 2 engine and full DirectX 11 support offers fantastic, immersive visuals that actually do take the first person shooter to a new technical level of brilliance. So, we’ve got both game-play shooting mechanical improvements, and 100% technically correct and objective technical improvements. Tell me again how Medal of Honor doesn’t do things as well as the competition? What are these writers smoking?"

A PC guy who's also a Battlefield fanboy that hates CoD and thinks MoH is just as good as Battlefield...

And 9 people agreed with this link?

How do you call out bias and DO THE EXACT SAME THING?

I agree that some of these low scores might be sour grapes but if you actually read...really dig into these reviews, you'll see that it's more than that. A lot of critics site technical issues like disappearing enemies, poor A.I., 1 slo motion breach too many...etc.

It's not all, "well, it's not like CoD so it's s***" like the author claims.

Periphereality1938d ago

I actually dislike Battlefield 3.
Reviewing the game without taking Call of Duty into consideration is stupid, considering everyone reading the review will be doing it.
Medal of Honor does have better sound and visuals than Call of Duty - a point about innovation.
I didn't find the AI to be poor, at least not with regards to the competition.

I find this trend of people assuming what games I enjoy quite interesting. I've clocked 300 hours plus in Arma II, and Red Orchestra 2 is my current favourite first person shooter. I don't play Battlefield 3, and have played more Call of Duty MW and MW2 than Battlefield 3.

Your preconceptions are interesting, but your extrapolations are worrying off point. Thanks for reading, though.

Periphereality1938d ago

I don't have enough "bubbles" so I'll reply on this thread.

I wasn't quote mining, they're the summary quotes found on Metacritic. You say that I "chose lines that seemingly support your argument." Nope. They're the actual lines taken from the summaries. The fact that they "support my argument", being blatantly right there, in your face, actually further supports my argument.

"that's what I can't understand." (why I rate a "mediocre" game as "good")

Because I found that whilst the campaign was visually fantastic, it was mediocre - but the multiplayer was fantastic, which made the game 'good'. Not great, but good.

And guess what? I enjoyed the slow motion breaches. Why? Because I enjoy head-shots. Am I wrong to enjoy them? Not really.

In my review I stated they sold themselves short for trying to appeal to the Call of Duty fans "rather than nurturing their 2010 child", but that alone didn't make it a bad game. Certainly not one worthy of 40, or by Edge's standard, 3/10.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1938d ago
Show all comments (27)
The story is too old to be commented.