• Medal of Honor now out and on Steam

    Published on 13-10-10 at 09:47 AM AEST by
    rec
    Medal of Honor is now available, and despite a seemingly unfixed multiplayer experience from closed beta, to open beta and into retail, the game is still garnering some attention. The game is $69.95 USD on the Australian Steam store, but if you're not interested in the seemingly cookie-cutter online experience, will the single player campaign justify the purchase?

    Probably not, with EDGE saying it's "a heavily scripted, linear shooting gallery in which hordes of enemies bundle towards you without any thought of self-preservation." Those thoughts seem consistent with other publishers, as the game has only produced meta review average of 74 across all platforms.

    The development was splintered between two teams, one working with the Unreal engine for single player, and another creating the multiplayer experience in Frostbite, the same engine used by Bad Company 2. That indecision seems to have carried across all faces of development; IGN gave Medal of Honor a 6.5 and make the comment that "Medal of Honor's real problem may be Danger Close's inability to commit to a particular direction for the game."
    1. Categories:
    2. First Person and Action

    Comments 18 Comments
    1. Aegis's Avatar
      Aegis - 13-10-10, 10:09 AM
      oh good, so the multiplayer side will be as easy for them to update as BFBC2. oh wait...
    1. grandinferno's Avatar
      grandinferno - 13-10-10, 12:07 PM
      After the shitty execution that was BC2 I'm going to give this a miss. The fact I couldn't crank the graphics on my PC is testament that it was just a mess. I did enjoy myself playing it, but there was always something shitty happening... whether it was graphics bugs or server issues. After this and MW2 I wonder whether these game houses have just lost the plot...
    1. Aegis's Avatar
      Aegis - 13-10-10, 12:29 PM
      2142 and bf2 were plagued by bugs as well - Red Name anyone? that they took forever to fix - no confidence in DICE at all.
    1. rec's Avatar
      rec - 13-10-10, 12:41 PM
      DICE are professionals at releasing beta products into retail, and then adding 'features' instead of fixing bugs.
    1. Aegis's Avatar
      Aegis - 13-10-10, 12:45 PM
      that implies they release things for the game after go-live ;P

      we've had, what? 3 patches? one of those rolled back changes from an earlier one..
    1. grandinferno's Avatar
      grandinferno - 13-10-10, 01:10 PM
      They're all starting to shit me. Like Modern Warfare 2... they keep adding game modes. Which means players are spread more thinly... which means now I have to wait even longer to try and get into a game with shitty IWnet.

      How the fuck do Valve get it so right with CS:S almost 6 years ago when these supposedly "big" game houses still make an absolute mess out of everything in 2010?
    1. craZy C's Avatar
      craZy C - 13-10-10, 02:58 PM
      Will be arking it up later tonight. If anything it should provide some time wasting for awhile...Hey it may even be fun.
    1. Lothar's Avatar
      Lothar - 13-10-10, 04:40 PM
      Quote Originally Posted by Aegis View Post
      2142 and bf2 were plagued by bugs as well - Red Name anyone? that they took forever to fix - no confidence in DICE at all.
      Yes it was a bug. It would not happen to random people as far as I could tell. Quite a few of the hacks that were out for that game had the option to sidechange however you still remaind in your current location without dieing. These hacks also had the option to do it to other random people in game also.

      Didn't stop the fact that EA / Dice didn't patch this vunrability for several patches though.
    1. mepm's Avatar
      mepm - 13-10-10, 06:41 PM
      any game where i have to restart a whole level (not just a checkpoint) because of a stupid bug is just unacceptable to me.
    1. Scott Hobbs's Avatar
      Scott Hobbs - 14-10-10, 08:55 AM
      What about people who want to give the game a try and all you people are getting on this forum and bagging the crap out of this game for everyone else. I mean could you possibly be kind about it and not be all 'fanboy'?
    1. grandinferno's Avatar
      grandinferno - 14-10-10, 10:07 AM
      Quote Originally Posted by Scott Hobbs View Post
      What about people who want to give the game a try and all you people are getting on this forum and bagging the crap out of this game for everyone else. I mean could you possibly be kind about it and not be all 'fanboy'?
      I played BFBC2 beta and it was buggy. I PAID for the release... buggy. I played the MOH beta. Buggy. Not about to make the same mistake twice.

      I really don't understand your point tbh. This is the internet.

    1. Aegis's Avatar
      Aegis - 14-10-10, 10:20 AM
      what inferno said. I can accept a buggy beta, but DICE has a solid history of not fixing shit. why continually reward incompetence?

      MOH's MP experience runs on the Frostbite engine, the same one used in BFBC2 - DICE have all but outright stated there'd be no more client updates for BFBC2 on PC because of the nature of the compile process used in the game. On what planet does that make MOH a purchase worth being positive about? Certainly not Earth.

      with regards to trying it, by all means give it a shot, entertainment enjoyment is up to the individual so draw your own conclusions. Point is we've tried it and didn't like it, you may be different.
    1. Lothar's Avatar
      Lothar - 14-10-10, 11:42 AM
      Quote Originally Posted by Aegis View Post
      what inferno said. I can accept a buggy beta, but DICE has a solid history of not fixing shit. why continually reward incompetence?
      More often than not it is not DICE's fault with the buggy game. Ever since BF2 and Special Forces they have been pushed with deadlines and told to physically stop all efforts on fixing bugs to work on new content that EA can sell.

      2142 in my mind was released 6 months too early. DICE wanted to hold off on the release to fix the issues with the server back end but EA had pushed the deadline 2 months ahead so it could be for a holiday release. This really hindered the game. God the supply create issue was not patched out for 3 patches... It was even pointed out in BETA ffs...
    1. Ratty's Avatar
      Ratty - 14-10-10, 05:49 PM
      Its good getting a laugh from passers by that give us shit for our point of view.... i didnt see a single person say "dont buy the game"

      No ones telling people not to buy it, but anyone that does is getting a friendly bit of advise that if its anything like past intances its not worth the pricetag.

      yeh maybe if it was $40 cheaper id think about buying it to tide me over till black ops... but not guna buy it for the full price....
    1. Aegis's Avatar
      Aegis - 14-10-10, 05:58 PM
      Quote Originally Posted by Lothar View Post
      More often than not it is not DICE's fault with the buggy game. Ever since BF2 and Special Forces they have been pushed with deadlines and told to physically stop all efforts on fixing bugs to work on new content that EA can sell.

      2142 in my mind was released 6 months too early. DICE wanted to hold off on the release to fix the issues with the server back end but EA had pushed the deadline 2 months ahead so it could be for a holiday release. This really hindered the game. God the supply create issue was not patched out for 3 patches... It was even pointed out in BETA ffs...
      yeah i know EA is a big factor, but EA didn't make DICE build the Frostbite engine so that updates would be fucking painful - DICE did that all on their lonesome.
    1. mepm's Avatar
      mepm - 14-10-10, 08:25 PM
      Quote Originally Posted by Scott Hobbs View Post
      What about people who want to give the game a try and all you people are getting on this forum and bagging the crap out of this game for everyone else. I mean could you possibly be kind about it and not be all 'fanboy'?
      lol its not just us...IGN dont give 6/10 for no reason
      i've finished the game and believe me it is painful.
    1. craZy C's Avatar
      craZy C - 18-10-10, 02:41 PM
      Well just like always, the reviews have been coming in and the players responses are being looked at, in all it is better than expected. Higher than first expected sales although this is possibly due to the Battlefield beta access.
      Anyway I am about 4hrs into the single and have completed about 4hrs online.
      Now not been anything unique it is however fun. I think its biggest problem is the fact that it is treading over ground already covered. The game doesn't have anything that makes it breakthrough or a standout, and that will be its biggest problem. It is fun killing Taliban. By the way two patches have already been released, only one though.
      Either way be your own judge it is entertaining me for the moment
    1. rec's Avatar
      rec - 03-11-10, 04:21 PM
      Even EA are now admitting that the game sucks...

      “I’m not going to comment on the sales because EA has an earnings report going out next week and we will unveil sales in that meeting”, EA Games’ Patrick Soderlund told Eurogamer. “What I can say is the game didn’t meet our quality expectations. In order to be successful in that space, we’re going to have to have a game that is really, really strong.”
      EA: Medal Of Honor "Didn’t Meet Our Quality Expectations" | Kotaku Australia
    Comments Leave Comment (Will be published after moderation, if you're not a registered user)

    Write 'Human', if you are one.

  • as
  • ..
    ..
  • as