Top
90°

OXCGN’s Medal of Honor Review: Reboot Error Or Upgrade?

OXCGN:

"I can’t help but notice that we’re seeing a lot of reboots in modern times. And it’s not just limited to our own industry; from gaming’s Wolfenstein, to the infamous Star Trek, we’re seeing reboots very commonly occurring these days due to the lower inclination of developers to start something new (but really, is it more work to reboot a series almost half a century old, or make something new?).

Medal of Honor is one of these titles falling into that category. Except that instead of trying to iterate once more what they had been doing since 1999, they decided to follow suit with the Modern Warfare trend, and start semi-anew."

The story is too old to be commented.
Proeliator2585d ago

Although the author was a tad harsh in some aspects, valid points were made.

The second-opinion segment was nice addition to the review, also, providing a bit of contrasting opinions.

gaminoz2585d ago

Always good to have multiple perspectives. I agree that some games that score 7 or 8 average on Metacritic etc. can often be really fun...more fun than some that score 9.

It just depends on your interest and if you like the genre and action, or single player or multi.

XboxOZ3602585d ago

I'm a Singleplayer type of guy, and thought that all the talk of it just being a short SP game would put me off, but my 'experience' of it is the opposite.

Plus, I was really sceptical of the online singleplayer Tier 1 section, but am finding out it's very much like the Forza 3 time-trial leaderboards. Where racers, in this case individuals, try to scrap off tenths, or thousands of seconds off a particular section of the game.

Giving the game huge replay-ability. One needs only look at Forza 3 to see that, their leaderboards in that section are constantly changing day by day, almost a year on from release.

gaminoz2585d ago (Edited 2585d ago )

I think that it caters to those who would buy it despite the criticism (it has been selling well) but think it is too bad that it decided to go copycat the modern warfare trend and use 'Taliban' controversy to get attention.

Proeliator2585d ago

I have to disagree with you on that note, sir. They didn't intentionally use the Taliban to get attention. They simply set out to make a game based on realistic times, and people freaked out, causing the 'controversy' to exist in the first place.

BadCircuit2585d ago

After the Six Days in Falujah uproar I think they knew what they were doing :)

XboxOZ3602585d ago (Edited 2585d ago )

I agree, there has been NO talk of the fact that the singleplayer mode of the game has the Taliban in it, but only the Mulitplayer side.

If it was because of the use of the word Taliban its self, then the entire use of it across the board in the game would be at question.

In order to have authentisity, one needs to follow the history, be that current or past, in order to has some continuity with the relevant times.

Look at Gearbox Studios, who were initially made up of ex-marines and soldiers who loved games and wanted to replicate the various conflict in WWII.

They used exactly the same areas, building, even actual soldiers of the time as well as actual encounters to give that realistic feel and approach to the 'game'

@ BadCircuit:

I'm only sorry that game never made it out of the gate, it was showing so much promise and was really being researched properly, and again, using real Rangers and Tier 1 teams as guides in the games making. Which is parramount these days.

One game many have let slip under the radar is Spec Ops: The Line, as it's shot in the slight future in Dubai, now that 'could' create problems with 'various' religious groups - simply because it shows war in that area, as well as the demise of the country itself.

gaminoz2585d ago

Maybe they knew, maybe not, but it would have been pretty naive to think that all people would see playing as the Taliban in a current conflict situation as the same as playing as the Germans in WW2 games.

While I agree that changing the name to Opposition Forces is just a change in name, they didn't start with that name or a fictional 'middle eastern country'. They must have known they would cop some attention (and any attention is good isn't it? Unless it is saying the game is crap- but even then some might want to see how crap it is lol.)

N4GAddict2585d ago

I'll wait for a price drop then

XboxOZ3602585d ago (Edited 2585d ago )

You can pick it up cheap enough now if you simply do some good shopping around, Grab it from overseas, as there are places that will give you great conversion rates right now so that the buyer gets a great deal, and still gets a game that has all the registration codes for multiplayer access and the beta access for Battlefield 3.

Get it secondhand and you miss out on those mate.

@ tigersnake86:

Me too, I only wish there were less games to be honest, that way gamers would get a better experience of all the games, rather than just a few, and thus have publishers and thus developers missing their mark with sales.

5 yrs ago we could basically buy every game that came out in due course, but these days, unless you have an extraordinary salary, or rich parents, then there will always be games one will miss out on - sadly.

N4GAddict2585d ago

I have a big backlog. I can wait

gaminoz2585d ago

LOL! Give reboot the boot! Original IPs? Too risky...so let's drag an old one out and 'reboot' it.

Still some seem very popular: Castlevania is the latest I think, and I'd love to see a Eternal Darkness reboot or sequel.

Bathyj2585d ago

I'm not against reboots in principle, in fact the opposite.

I'm just sick of hearing the word. Its one of those buzz words that you never heard before and then suddenly you hear it everywhere.

Hell, reboot Tenchu for and I'll name my first male child Rikimaru.

Karum2585d ago

I have to say, I REALLY enjoyed the single player campaign.

It seemed a little short to me although I think I clocked around like 6-7 hours on normal difficulty or something like that.

The thing is though, the SP ended and I was like "wtf? thats it? I want moar!!" which is a good thing and a bad thing...good because obviously to me the game was good enough that I just wanted to keep going and going but bad that it just seemed really short.

No complaints about the gameplay, I found it a lot of fun.

the MP I won't comment on, simply because even though I try...I suck at online FPS....I suck badly lol.

gaminoz2585d ago

Yeah multi these days rewards the really good (or those with a lot of time to get really good) and discourages those who just want to play for fun.

I miss Timesplitters.

XboxOZ3602585d ago (Edited 2585d ago )

Agreed, I suppose if you have had lots of experience with FPS, and don't mind just going from start to finish as fast as possible, then most games can have short play-cycles.

BLACK was much the same, some giving it a little as 5 hrs, with one guy on one forum stating he could do it in 2hrs, 57min and 34 secs, seriously, he timed it.

Thing was, how did he do that, and obviously he missed the WHOLE point of the game, enjoyment, not a land speed record.

Like you say, having a cliffhanger allows the game to continue further with DLC and the next iteration, much like how they have tied the various levels in with each.

Notice how you're not going o a generals office, or some menue selection or whatever for the next level, you simply merge from one to the other through criss-cross cut-scenes, yet still have control of the camera, giving you the sense of still being involved in the game in a fashion.

I would expect the ending is much the same, stopping right when you expect to go to the next level . . .

There were sections I simply had to say, enough, give it a break, come back later and attack it from a different angle or perspective. Especially the last segment of the Apachie Mortar entrenchment section of that level. The last mountain was a pain, but once I worked out HOW to do it, it was fine.

SAme can be said for other sections. You can approach things in slightly different ways, and the bit about it being on rails, well dahh . . . the story arch is aimed at quick, decisive moves and quick action, not roams around the country side to go off wandering around to see what you can find. Sheeessses.

@ Bathyj:

It will be interesting to see what ppl think then of the 'reboot' or SpecOps: The Line. Some say it's a game that shoould stay where it ws, but after seeing it at E3, I think many are going to be very surprised indeed.

It just doesn't pay publishers to takeon developers now with new IP's.

The buyers market is very unforgiving, and unless the game ranks in the mid to upper 8/10' on metacritic, they simply do not get a second run at the game.

And metacritic is very very flawed and subjective to say the least, and has stopped many publishers finishing games because they have estimated they will only get a low 8 or even a high 7 ranking, so they ditch the new IP before it's even finished.

Sad world we live in, isn't it.

Show all comments (19)