Medal of Honor Warfighter

[jomni]

I just bought the game. Didn't get the chane to play because of XCOM and ETS2.  Maybe during the weekend.  I liked the first one. :)

[Grimnirsson]

Big disappointment! I liked the first one too, thought the Beta was quite nice and now after playing the full game...it's shit! Small boring maps, actually bad map design, spawn kills/deaths all over the place, no tactics possible, small corridors are your only options, unbalanced maps, they changed (nerfed) the guns which were nice in the Beta and now do suck, the HD pack doesn't help at all - the game looks like a N 64 game texture-wise and there's NO destruction at all - despite their Frostbite 2 hailings all the time. Any CoD game looks MUCH better.

Will play the SP, then sell it as fast as I can - that was my last EA shooter!

[Jarhead0331]

Yep. I've heard this title blows.  Too bad.

[Grimnirsson]

The silly thing is, that the maps are much larger than what the players are allowed to use. Yesterday we spawned behind some road block structure and we couldn't jump over it to get back to the playground part of the map. So we started to run around behind the playable area always waiting for the 'you're leaving the combat area' message that always pops up when you cross a certain line on the maps. That's absurd and bad design in itself but it didn't show up for a loooong while...we could run around even cross a river, were impressed by a little forest built with 2D trees...while the other players were caught in a tiny part of the existing map where they were allowed to fight. If they would remove the artificial borders the maps would be much better because they would be much bigger. I can't understand these folks who put years into such a game and then the result is as silly as this one. At least make sure such situations as I just described don't happen so you don't make a fool of yourself as designers...

[Jarhead0331]

Hopefully COD Black-ops II will be better.

[Grimnirsson]

It will be better, no doubt about that. Activision/Treyarch/IW don't need to forcefully copy another game like EA/DICE/Danger Close try...and fail
The map design is much better in CoD (no matter which CoD we are talking here), the action is made for the maps and the maps for the action, the overall concept feels right...one doesn't have to love this kind of sport military arcade shooter style but what CoD does it does well and the designers (and the publisher behind them) don't change the core experience they just improve and expand in little steps. Not the complete overhaul as was the case in BF3...you buy the game, you play it for over 100 hours and then comes the Über-Patch and you have a totally different game. I will have a lot of fun with Blops 2 that's for sure :)

[jomni]

The story is ok but it's pretty typical and un-creative. Trying play with the players emotions.  There are some good battle sequences but generally uninspired. They put in some Bourne-type chase scenes which really make the game more like a Hollywood movie than a military-based shooter.  And the bane of all kiddie shooters -- those HMG-toting baddies in very heavy armor -- appear in this game.  Sheesh! 

The multiplayer has potential.  It is actually more tactical and slower-paced than Battlefield 3.  Run and gun does not work.  Loads of weapons customization is a plus.
But the graphics and camo schemes are laughable (very vibrant contrasts) = N64-ish as someone stated earlier.  Rag doll physics when you die is so old school.  Does all your muscles soften up when you get shot and die?  I dunno.

No more Taliban in multiplayer.  It's special forces vs special forces of any country. Quite an absurd setting that is used by any other shooter.  US vs. Taliban was unique in the previous title and it was interesting to play.  But now I guess they got scared of reigniting the controversy that they stirred before. To bad.  It was actually a good selling point. :(