Medal of Honor (MoH) Warfighter Review

By Kirk Hamilton on October 30, 2012, 11:12 PM

The flashlights look pretty good. As I went through my notes searching for something positive I'd written about Medal of Honor Warfighter, that line stuck out to me. "The flashlights look pretty good." They do look pretty good. Whatever lighting magic Electronic Arts has handed around to its subsidiary studios is nifty and authentic-looking. Often, when a guy shines his flashlight at you, you'll think, "Wow, that really looks like a guy with a flashlight!" before shooting him. If only the rest of the game measured up.

The questionably-named Medal of Honor Warfighter is a first-person military shooter developed by Danger Close and published by EA. The Medal of Honor series has become, in most every respect, a flagrant imitation of Activision's much ballyhooed Call of Duty series. You play the game from the first-person perspective. You hold a machine gun and shoot bad guys, almost exclusively foreigners. That's about all there is to it.

The video game industry perpetuates a number of tiresome trends, but none is more remarked-upon than the reign of the realistic military shooter. Ever since 2007's (quite good) Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, the world of video gaming has seen shooter after shooter after shooter after shooter, all set in modern times, all dedicated to the deft recreation of the latest in man-killing machinery. Given the earth-shattering financial success these types of games find, casual observers could be forgiven for assuming that all gamers prefer to view the world through a reflex sight down the barrel of a gun. 

Read the complete review.




User Comments: 24

Got something to say? Post a comment
2 people like this | MrBungle said:

I haven't bought a Medal of Honor game since getting burned on Pacific Assault... sounds like they're STILL just as bad. Thanks for wasting your time so I didn't end up wasting mine.

Guest said:

I've played this game and it completely lives up to the hype.....is it like BF3? yes, is it like MW3? sure but we always want more, personally I think your review sucked, go get a real job...

Guest said:

What's up, EA Marketing?

TekGun TekGun said:

I normally have a certain amount of scepticism when reading reviews, but this is one I believe GJ.

Hassan Al Rawi Hassan Al Rawi said:

I preordered this game , and I regret it , this game sucks in so many different ways that I wish you guys reviewed it earlier.

Hassan Al Rawi Hassan Al Rawi said:

I've played this game and it completely lives up to the hype.....is it like BF3? yes, is it like MW3? sure but we always want more, personally I think your review sucked, go get a real job...

Is it like BF3 ? Hell No , not even close , the game play in BF3 is much better than this one.

The game have really bad story , crappy multiplayer. the only thing that relates to BF3 is the frostbite game engine (and again it's not the same gameplay style in BF3 )

TS-56336 TS-56336 said:

I preordered this game , and I regret it , this game sucks in so many different ways that I wish you guys reviewed it earlier.

I also never planned to pre-order this one. Good thing there's NFS Most Wanted, thank goodness.

dawei1993 said:

I've always disliked medal of honor... : ( But the battlefield series always rocked : ) !!! Are they separate divisions or what? Why such drastic differences...

Burty117 Burty117, TechSpot Chancellor, said:

I've always disliked medal of honor... : ( But the battlefield series always rocked : ) !!! Are they separate divisions or what? Why such drastic differences...

Yeah, both completely different developers

psycros psycros said:

"It's surprising how quickly the fireteams engender feelings of trust and camaraderie, even with complete strangers. Something about having one person to rely on makes things feel more focused and trusting than having a whole team."

This is why I only do multiplayer on LAN. Online shooters are the breeding grounds of faceless, brainless dudebros.

fteumer said:

Seems like a tired rehash of the shooter genre. im still waiting for something truly "next-gen" to arrive on the scene.

j05hh j05hh said:

I bought this for multiplayer and disliked it immediately. I already have BF3, MOA-W doesn't compare to BF3 game play at all. MOA-W feels like an updated BHD or something.. if you're undecided between BF3 and MOA hands down BF3 + Premium.

Jack Reacher said:

I hope the reviewer feels better now. Give him a cookie and let him jump back on World of Warcraft for some "real action". I'm not sure what this "reviewer" expected war to be like? Did EA leave out the flashing billboards and the naked dancing women ... ? Again?

BlueDrake said:

Seems like a tired rehash of the shooter genre. im still waiting for something truly "next-gen" to arrive on the scene.

When would that be? I'm sorry to hear your dislike, but tell that to the industry's face. They love to rehash the same things, there's no point taking risks on something that will bomb. Especially in an industry where everything is playing copycat, because they can't come up with original ideas.

Why do you think the indie devs are running circles around them? They take the risks on good ideas AND failures, while the big companies just focus on the rehashed stuff. Until someone takes a stab at something good, they'd rather play it safe with what's selling. Which leads to just a sickness of big company games, because you see one game you'll see it all. Especially when nobody wants to branch outwards, taking a stab at something from a new angle.

I'll give props to BF2142 on that one, because future is hardly set in stone. You see just the generic modern style games. Which makes me hold back my money, and go invest in actual indie games instead. Something that's original or at least enjoyable, getting my value's worth out of something. I'm constantly poking at the Greenlight sometimes, see what good is coming through there.

Don't settle for this second rate gaming, when you can find something better out there. So what if it's an indie dev? You might actually enjoy something, that isn't just another mindless shooter?! What a concept! </end thoughts>

Guest said:

Hassan Al Rawi wrote: "I wish you guys reviewed it earlier."

Blaming TechSport because you decided to order a game before reading ANY reviews? Are you for real? :D You get what you deserve when people like you continue to make the huge mistake to buy game way too early. And why do you need ANY game so early? Does your life depend on it if you can't brag to others that you have the game earlier than they have? I hope you learned a lesson.

Guest said:

Jack reacher wrote: "I hope the reviewer feels better now. Give him a cookie and let him jump back on World of Warcraft for some "real action". I'm not sure what this "reviewer" expected war to be like? Did EA leave out the flashing billboards and the naked dancing women ... ? Again?"

I get tired of people like you attacking reviewers on a personal level and ignoring the fact that this game is reviewed by 50-100 web sites with an AVERAGE(!) 5.5(!!!) out of 10. Don't blame the messenger, blame the developer.

Guest said:

TAKE mine and everyone elses advice WHEN WE SAY do not buy this game ITS SERIOUSLY BAD!!!!,it sucks I wish I didnt waste my money

Guest said:

Avoid like the plague, this game is horrible. Game play is awful, movement is unresponsive, cut scenes are jagged and unpolished as is the game play even in high res. A complete waist of money. Even GameSpot almost got it right for a change and gave this game a rating of 6, in fact it's more like a 4. Now that I have saved you money (as I doubt you'll be buying this turd) go out and buy something nice for Christmas.

Guest said:

I love FPS (first person shooters) but this game has put me off for life. Stay clear of this poorly made game, it's truly shocking.

Guest said:

Good review - your closing sentences summed it up perfectly really, if youve played a FPS in the last last few years it is completely pointless buying this. I have bad Company 2 and BF3, both excellent games, I dont think I'll bother with another FPS franchise they are just flogging a dead horse.

Guest said:

Purchased this game last night at Bestbuy for $29.99 (Limited Edition) Gameplay and Frostbite 2 engine (nothing like BF3 and Frostbite 1 engine) are decent, Graphics could of been improved but this might be the first of many to come on the new Frostbite engine (tweaking may be needed) Online gamplay looked aged, but still fun. HD Graphics install (for XBOX360) is needed to clear up some visualizations. Have not touched Disc 2 (Single Player) yet, but will dig into that this evening.

Worth $59, Nope, Worth $39-49...probabbly not. But at $30 for a recently released game (and multiple friends on XboxLive playing it) it was worth it. I picked up BF3 on last years Blackfriday for PC @ $27 (even though I had it on XBOX) it was a great addition, so when MoH Warfighter went onsale, I snagged a copy.

Yes its a run and shoot 'em up game, Its typical military style needing to duck for cover.

Worth taking a break from other games, and running through this campaign with not feeling dedicated to rank up (like on COD) makes this game a great addition to my collection.

maybe everyone else will grab it when it goes for $19.99 (but not many will be online) so I decided not to wait.

Guest said:

I loved this game and still play it to this day. Any person who has served in the Active duty military will appreciate the attention to detail the developers put into it. MOH has made me swear off COD indefinitely. My least favorite part of this game is that they tried to imitate those games in the storyline by practically making the characters into super men who go on ridiculous adventures. I'm definitely glad I didn't read the reviews before I purchased this game. If you're a veteran who despises the horribly unrealistic and Hollywood style war games that dominate the market like me, give MOH a try. Maybe you'll get chills just like I did while playing.

Guest said:

I usually don't post on subjects that have already been discussed years before my experience with it but your review was so cynical (and completely worthless in my opinion) that I somehow feel that in this case it might be worth my time to do so. I actually just bought warfighter on the playstation network. I got tired of call of duty and thought this might be a different experience and it certainly was. I seem to have hit a brick wall and because of a conversation I had with a buddy of mine (not worth going into) I decided to come online to see what others had to say. Although your review did present many valid arguments I don't think it was entirely fair. I agree that many of the problems that I encountered up to this point that are very frustrating. For example the almost totally worthless auto aim function. However I don't see any reason to completely discard what they were trying to do. The game play itself is better and more intense than call of duty ( a series that has put much effort into improving multiplayer and online features but for some reason flat out refuses to make any improvements to how the game is played.) You brought up the peak action as a good feature and to this day (3 years after the release of the last medal of honor) call of duty has not added it. How awful would it actually be to take a good idea and apply it regardless of how simple the idea may be. that's just one example but small additions like that do do help a lot in making your experience more enjoyable. But no!! Call of duty insists of shoving all these extra features in our faces but cant be bothered to make small improvements in what is otherwise a great series. Why do they do this? Because they know they can get away with it. They know that the average gamer isn't looking for better game quality. They want the same crap over and over with newer features. I don't think its safe to say that medal of honor is little more than a knock off of call of duty. Honestly how much different can u expect 2 military based fps's to be? It's in those small changes and additions that improve game quality. Not this relentless wave bonus features that are just to keep gamer's like you oblivious to the fact that they haven't improved a damn thing. Medal of honor might have been onto something. They had some great ideas. Unfortunately their execution was poorly thought out and (for lack of a better word) sloppy. But not an altogether terrible game. Definitely worth they buy and a pleasant break from the consistently disappointing call of duty series

Guest said:

Just a quick addition to my earlier opinion. You said that enemies will often run straight at you with out applying any tactics. Highly exaggerated!!! In my experience with this game I was often engaged by the enemy from a distance. The few times when they actually did run right at me actually is in fact sometimes used as strategy in war. It's meant to take you off guard and its was actually pretty damn effective. For example the lvl which you need to chase after that one guy on foot. At one point all these guys just ran out and mobbed me. That's called setting a trap genius. I think the real problem is that you just couldn't cope with it

Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.