PDA

View Full Version : Reviews



Retro
10-12-2010, 08:52 AM
Not looking so good, 6/10 from IGN.

http://www.ign.com/videos/2010/10/12/medal-of-honor-video-review

Retro
10-12-2010, 08:59 AM
Not a very kind review from Giant Bomb either,

http://www.giantbomb.com/medal-of-honor/61-29336/reviews/

Trez
10-12-2010, 09:01 AM
Just watched this on Respawn. Major props to the Dice portion of the game but meh to the campaign...

[yt:rcyv97fq]IydkTKI4eOM[/yt:rcyv97fq]

Retro
10-12-2010, 09:10 AM
Game Trailers.

Best review I've seen yet, but it's still pretty harsh. The final score is good but suprising after how much they complain about the game.

http://www.gametrailers.com/video/review-hd-medal-of/705963

Sckrapps
10-12-2010, 09:19 AM
The money part of the Giant Bomb review, or at least for Team MPers:

"The multiplayer side of Medal of Honor feels like DICE took the action of Battlefield: Bad Company 2, streamlined bits of it to focus more on shooting and less on support roles, sped the whole thing up a bit, and placed most of the action on smaller maps. Some aspects from the single-player game, like the way you can reload early to keep one bullet in the chamber, or the ability to go prone or slide into cover by hitting duck while running, aren't present at all. It's a weird disconnect that's unfortunate, because those features are neat additions that would have added to the multiplayer experience and helped give the game a feel of its own. Instead it feels caught between the fast, loose style of Modern Warfare 2 and the somewhat more surgical class-based play of Bad Company 2. While it's totally competent, there are a few instances of invisible walls on the multiplayer maps that just seem like totally boneheaded errors. Also, the things you unlock as you level up the game's three classes are real yawners. With 15 levels per class, it's a waste to have one or two levels just give you the enemy team's statistically identical weapons."

Sckrapps
10-12-2010, 09:23 AM
And Gamezone's review. Bummer, I was kind of hoping to hear better news.

http://pc.gamezone.com/reviews/item/med ... or_review/ (http://pc.gamezone.com/reviews/item/medal_of_honor_review/)

Retro
10-12-2010, 09:25 AM
Something scary,

Single player campaign clocks in at 4.5 hours. Multiplayer only has 8 maps and not all modes use all the maps.

After hearing so many people here were getting this game, I became very tempted to go out today and pick it up. But the game is $69.99 in Canada and after reading about 12 reviews and finding out the SP is only 4.5 hours, this is a pass.

Borlaxx
10-12-2010, 09:47 AM
Wow, it is no secret that I didn't hold high hopes for this game, but these reviews are even worse than I thought they would be. I thought the single player game would be the highlight, not shorter than MW2. Hopefully those of you who got the game will still get some enjoyment out of it.

REMEC87
10-12-2010, 09:54 AM
I wouldn't judge it so harshly yet. When I first picked up a copy of BC2 I found it hard to get into it after playing MW2 for months. After joining team MP, things completly changed and I think the same may be true for MoH. I guess we will see.

At worse,$70 is a small fee for a month's worth of entertainment until BO comes out.

Retro
10-12-2010, 09:56 AM
I thought the single player game would be the highlight, not shorter than MW2.
Damn, how long did it take you to beat MW2? Knocked that sucker out in 4 and a half hours and that was allowing each cut scene to play out!

Borlaxx
10-12-2010, 09:58 AM
I thought the single player game would be the highlight, not shorter than MW2.
Damn, how long did it take you to beat MW2? Knocked that sucker out in 4 and a half hours and that was allowing each cut scene to play out!
Probably took me about 6 hours, but that is because I took my time, and died a lot.

The closing comments from IGN are really sad:


Medal of Honor's real problem may be Danger Close's inability to commit to a particular direction for the game. Swinging wildly between the horrors and danger of war and unrealistic action movie moments and hampered by a surplus of boring scripted sequences, not even DICE's talented multiplayer designers are able to elevate Medal of Honor to something memorable. Combined with Danger Close's fixation on delivering an experience about a war that Americans are deeply ambivalent about, and multiplayer that remains likely to incite controversy about its content after players have moved on to deeper, more engaging multiplayer options, Medal of Honor is one of the bigger disappointments of 2010.

Retro
10-12-2010, 10:07 AM
At worse,$70 is a small fee for a month's worth of entertainment until BO comes out.
:-o Small fee? A 4 hour campaign and a multiplayer that has apparently seen little to no change since the heavily maligned beta? I really hope the game will be better than stated for those getting it. But knowing that DICE will not really be supporting it does not give me hope. DICE will be focued on the BF: BC2 Vietnam pack and getting their own BattleField 3 ready.

I'll probably rent MoH in the next couple days, but I can't justify $70 for something that will be a distraction for a month at most.

I really do hope the reviews are wrong and the game will be solid because there are a lot of people looking forward to it.

Borlaxx
10-12-2010, 10:10 AM
At worse,$70 is a small fee for a month's worth of entertainment until BO comes out.
:-o Small fee? A 4 hour campaign and a multiplayer that has apparently seen little to no change since the heavily maligned beta? I really hope the game will be better than stated for those getting it. But knowing that DICE will not really be supporting it does not give me hope. DICE will be focued on the BF: BC2 Vietnam pack and getting their own BattleField 3 ready.

I'll probably rent MoH in the next couple days, but I can't justify $70 for something that will be a distraction for a month at most.

I really do hope the reviews are wrong and the game will be solid because there are a lot of people looking forward to it.
For once, I agree with Retro. Mark this day on your calendars.

I may pick the game up when it is in the bargin bin.........right after Black Ops comes out :p

Seriously, I hope it is better than the reviews. People had such high hopes for this game, and I have high hopes for Black Ops, so there is no guarentee Black Ops will not be a major let down as well.

Retro
10-12-2010, 10:10 AM
Probably took me about 6 hours, but that is because I took my time, and died a lot.

The closing comments from IGN are really sad:


Medal of Honor's real problem may be Danger Close's inability to commit to a particular direction for the game. Swinging wildly between the horrors and danger of war and unrealistic action movie moments and hampered by a surplus of boring scripted sequences, not even DICE's talented multiplayer designers are able to elevate Medal of Honor to something memorable. Combined with Danger Close's fixation on delivering an experience about a war that Americans are deeply ambivalent about, and multiplayer that remains likely to incite controversy about its content after players have moved on to deeper, more engaging multiplayer options, Medal of Honor is one of the bigger disappointments of 2010.


I had to plow through in between a feeding break for my daughter!!!

The IGN review was really harsh, no forgiveness at all. While I won't try MoH until I rent it later in the week, I think Halo: Reach is the biggest disappointment of the year, horrible game.

REMEC87
10-12-2010, 10:18 AM
At worse,$70 is a small fee for a month's worth of entertainment until BO comes out.
:-o Small fee? A 4 hour campaign and a multiplayer that has apparently seen little to no change since the heavily maligned beta? I really hope the game will be better than stated for those getting it. But knowing that DICE will not really be supporting it does not give me hope. DICE will be focued on the BF: BC2 Vietnam pack and getting their own BattleField 3 ready.

I'll probably rent MoH in the next couple days, but I can't justify $70 for something that will be a distraction for a month at most.

I really do hope the reviews are wrong and the game will be solid because there are a lot of people looking forward to it.
For once, I agree with Retro. Mark this day on your calendars.

I may pick the game up when it is in the bargin bin.........right after Black Ops comes out :p

Seriously, I hope it is better than the reviews. People had such high hopes for this game, and I have high hopes for Black Ops, so there is no guarentee Black Ops will not be a major let down as well.

That is $17.50 per week for entertainment over the next 4 weeks until BO. I imagnie that most of us probably spend that on coffee and snacks in a week. Think of it as a diet...god know i could use it! :)) =)) :))

Retro
10-12-2010, 10:28 AM
That is $17.50 per week for entertainment over the next 4 weeks until BO. I imagnie that most of us probably spend that on coffee and snacks in a week. Think of it as a diet...god know i could use it! :)) =)) :))
Nah I'm a former sales guy, the whole breaking down the price trick doesn't fly with me. I can use that $70 or $17.50 per week for far better things than a game that so far appears to be broken at worst and passable at best.

Like I said, I hope all the reviews are wrong and the game turns out great. But I'll settle for dropping $4.99 on a one day rental as it seems that's more than I will need to get through the game. That way I'll still have $65 that I'm sure I will need in order to buy a map pack for Black Ops ~x(

Psalm
10-12-2010, 10:40 AM
Man...I hope it really isn't as bad as the reviews.... are these reviewers getting payed off by activision? It seems like total slams. It can't be that bad? Can it?

REMEC87
10-12-2010, 10:45 AM
That is $17.50 per week for entertainment over the next 4 weeks until BO. I imagnie that most of us probably spend that on coffee and snacks in a week. Think of it as a diet...god know i could use it! :)) =)) :))
Nah I'm a former sales guy, the whole breaking down the price trick doesn't fly with me. I can use that $70 or $17.50 per week for far better things than a game that so far appears to be broken at worst and passable at best.

Like I said, I hope all the reviews are wrong and the game turns out great. But I'll settle for dropping $4.99 on a one day rental as it seems that's more than I will need to get through the game. That way I'll still have $65 that I'm sure I will need in order to buy a map pack for Black Ops ~x(

You didn't fall for it, eh? fair enough. I'm an accountant and that usually works. :D The fact of it is I only play FPS games so i will buy even the not so good ones and judge for myself. Besides, I never, ever buy myself anything except for this so the odd $70 every couple of months isn't so bad.

Let agree to disagree. :cheers:

Jackie R
10-12-2010, 11:12 AM
Oh well...too bad the game got some poor reviews but I doubt many people on the Call of Duty side of the fence would have been pulled over to Medal of Honor even if the scores had been much higher. I just hope that at least some of you who were planning on getting it are still willing to give the game a chance.

Retro
10-12-2010, 11:17 AM
Man...I hope it really isn't as bad as the reviews.... are these reviewers getting payed off by activision? It seems like total slams. It can't be that bad? Can it?
People are saying that sites like IGN are being paid off and don't want to give out good scores so that Black Ops gets a higher score. I think that arguement is complete B.S. The game is made by EA and IGN is constantly getting hammered by fanboys everytime they give an EA game a high score because they believe EA is paying them off. I would say something is off if multiple site were giving it a great score and one or two were slaming it, but that's not the case here.

REMEC87
10-12-2010, 11:19 AM
Here is a video review for G4TV....4 out of 5 stars.

http://g4tv.com/videos/49224/Medal-of-Honor-Video-Review/

Retro
10-12-2010, 11:21 AM
Oh well...too bad the game got some poor reviews but I doubt many people on the Call of Duty side of the fence would have been pulled over to Medal of Honor even if the scores had been much higher. I just hope that at least some of you who were planning on getting it are still willing to give the game a chance.
I don't think has anything to do with people being a fan of CoD or not. I put down MW2 like no one else and I'm a total BC2 fan. But I'm much more drawn to CoD: BO than MoH. I think most people on this site at least are more concerned with getting the best entertainment and biggest bang for their buck over fanboy tendencies.

Borlaxx
10-12-2010, 11:22 AM
Man...I hope it really isn't as bad as the reviews.... are these reviewers getting payed off by activision? It seems like total slams. It can't be that bad? Can it?
People are saying that sites like IGN are being paid off and don't want to give out good scores so that Black Ops gets a higher score. I think that arguement is complete B.S. The game is made by EA and IGN is constantly getting hammered by fanboys everytime they give an EA game a high score because they believe EA is paying them off. I would say something is off if multiple site were giving it a great score and one or two were slaming it, but that's not the case here.
I have a hard time believing this as well. Just anti-COD fanboys getting pissed off.

Honestly when I get a FPS game I am looking for a MP that will keep me entertained for a long time, and it just sounds like there isn't enough to the MoH MP to keep it going for long. At least those who got it will get early access to Battlefield 3, which from what I hear, should be bad ass.

Jackie R
10-12-2010, 11:35 AM
Oh well...too bad the game got some poor reviews but I doubt many people on the Call of Duty side of the fence would have been pulled over to Medal of Honor even if the scores had been much higher. I just hope that at least some of you who were planning on getting it are still willing to give the game a chance.
I don't think has anything to do with people being a fan of CoD or not. I put down MW2 like no one else and I'm a total BC2 fan. But I'm much more drawn to CoD: BO than MoH. I think most people on this site at least are more concerned with getting the best entertainment and biggest bang for their buck over fanboy tendencies.
I guess that is what I was trying to say. Those individuals who prefer the game style of COD as opposed to MoH (and I'm not trying to say that there is anything wrong with that) would probably not have been influenced (or at least not much) even if the game had scored much higher amongst the critics. I may even pick BO up if there are no MPs to be found online come the release date in November.

REMEC87
10-12-2010, 11:43 AM
I am definitely picking up BO in November regardless of whether there are MPs on MoH or not. I will also probably be getting Brink, BC2 Vietnam, Homefront and battlefield 3 to boot.

ustolemygmrtag
10-12-2010, 11:51 AM
I don't know. I sometimes find that the current reviewers are always headstrong for one game, and usually give other games less than deserved reviews. IGN has always given Activision great reviews on the COD games. I know this doesn't mean much. But, I personally am the type to trust an individual MP over some schmuck in an office writing a bad review because the "Fan-Boy" inside made him do it. I have to say I am a BFBC2 Fan-Boy, but will remain open on this one so you guys will have a good review to go by.

Retro
10-12-2010, 11:53 AM
I am definitely picking up BO in November regardless of whether there are MPs on MoH or not. I will also probably be getting Brink, BC2 Vietnam, Homefront and battlefield 3 to boot.
Brink looks pretty awesome.

Ok so I just ran out and picked up MoH (rental), time to see if the reviews are full of it or have some merit.

Disclaimer: I am in no way a fanboy of any FPS game. There are only 2 franchises in all of gaming that I consider myself a fanboy of, Fallout & Mass Effect.

ustolemygmrtag
10-12-2010, 11:57 AM
I might get off a little early today, if so, I will post a leanthy review tonight.

Jackie R
10-12-2010, 02:16 PM
A mostly positive review from PSNation:

PSNAtion Medal of Honor Review (http://www.psnation.org/2010/10/12/review-medal-of-honor-ps3/)

DayliteMag
10-12-2010, 03:00 PM
I'm an MP Fanboy, and will buy/play any game, anytime, as long as at least one or two of my MP peeps are doing the same! I will be on tonight and hopefully be able to provide a comprehensive review in the AM.

Retro
10-12-2010, 03:26 PM
Almost done the single player and I'm not really liking it.

The Good:
Looks great, not sure why some reviewers are complaining. Graphics are nice, smooth framerate.

Gameplay is solid, no real problems. The only thing is the sliding to cover, this is not Gears of War where you hug the cover. A lot of the time you can actually slide right past the cover and find your self completely exposed to enemy fire. It's nothing major, just a minor issue that only comes up once in awhile.

Cut scenes are cheesy, but well done. If anything they above most FPS titles.

The Bad:
Missed out on Modern Warfare?? Well here's your chance. It's like they just re-skinned MW2 for the SP.

Way too easy. I am playing it on HARD and I am about 75% done the campaign. I have probably been killed 4 to 5 times. There is really no challenge to be found. It's like the enemies literally wait for you to heal if you've been hit. While I am no fan of MW2 I at least found a challenge in that game.

There is no emotional tie to the game. In Bad Company you feel apart of something, your AI team is important and you don't want to see anything bad happen to them. In MW2 when the general turns and guns you and Ghost down, I wanted to reach into the screen beat him to a pulp! Your AI team in MoH? Who cares.

Shooting, part of what makes it so easy is the shooting. Maybe I've become too accustomed to Battlefield and their ballistic physics. No bullet drop, no challenge.

Visuals. Ok I already said that they were a plus but here's the thing, pretty much all the levels look EXACTLY the same. Sure they're pretty, but there is no variety to be found.


I can not test out Multiplayer as this is a rental and I'm not about to shell out for EA's online pass.
To me the Single player is important and apart of the games value. If it's only about the multiplayer than to me it's not woth it. DICE made 1943 a multiplayer only game and it was only $15. $60 to $70 for 8 maps and a scaled down mash up of BC2 and MW2? I'll pass.

For those that bought the game, I hope you find it enjoyable. For those on the fence, rent it first.

Pwizzle99
10-12-2010, 03:33 PM
Almost done the single player and I'm not really liking it.

The Good:
Looks great, not sure why some reviewers are complaining. Graphics are nice, smooth framerate.

Gameplay is solid, no real problems. The only thing is the sliding to cover, this is not Gears of War where you hug the cover. A lot of the time you can actually slide right past the cover and find your self completely exposed to enemy fire. It's nothing major, just a minor issue that only comes up once in awhile.

Cut scenes are cheesy, but well done. If anything they above most FPS titles.

As much as I didnt want to.... I agree with you 100%. I wanted this game to be badass and to blow my mind. But it's as if every mission is the exact same. And it's confusing at first because you change persona's based on the mission you are playing. So you (or at least I did) get confused as to who you are at that moment when your team mates are telling you to do something. (ie. "Adams, put some fire on that MG!" yet 2 seconds ago you were "Rabbit"). It will be a "get-by" until BO comes out but it will not take the place of BFBC2 for me as I see myself going back to BFBC2 about 50-50 until next month's release.

Borlaxx
10-13-2010, 09:47 AM
Here is Gamespot's review, which is one of the better ones I have seen at 7.5/10. http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/ ... ot;title;2 (http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/medalofhonor/review.html?tag=topslot;title;2)

The Good

* Well-paced campaign
* Immersive dialogue
* Taut multiplayer action.

The Bad

* Heavy-handed campaign scripting
* Enemy AI isn't terribly realistic
* Some incongruous cutscenes
* Steep multiplayer learning curve.

They too complain of some flaws in the single player game, but apparently they seem to like the MP portion, although they say it is very unforgiving. As a MW2 player, I did appreciate the reference to the realism when they took a shot at MW2 in saying "All of your abilities and assets remain strictly within the realm of realism, meaning you will always hear the footsteps of an enemy running up behind you" but they also seem to take a shot at BC2 when they go on to say "and you can't revive your bullet-ridden teammates."

Here is the closing paragraph.


Though it may be tempting to look at its flaws and dismiss Medal of Honor as inferior to its competitors, there is a lot to enjoy here. The campaign has its shortcomings, but its unique sense of scope and well-orchestrated pacing make it an enjoyably cohesive adventure. Tier One mode offers an accessible yet formidable challenge, and the competitive multiplayer captures the brutal intensity of a battlefield where one errant move can result in your abrupt death. Medal of Honor doesn't set any new standards for the genre, but it delivers a lot of entertainment and excitement if you're looking to add a splash of realism to your first-person shooting.

Quixote37
10-13-2010, 11:56 AM
I may have posted in the wrong forum earlier. Got it yesterday, played it last night. The campaing is ok so far. The storyline is better than MW2 so far and some of the action is better.

Multiplayer... Meh. I'm a noob. So MW2 has been my first and only game so far. I know folks complained about it but, in my opinion, MoH is not a better game. The graphics are ok, but it's almost too realistic from a vision perspective too play well. It's difficult to describe... The players, enemy and friendly, look alike. The little triangle for friendly's is difficult to see. The enemy, with no indcator of any kind is difficult to adjust to. Not bad, per se, but a change for me.

The only real complaint I have (well, 2) is the spawn camping is in full swing and the sniper rifles are woefuly underpowered and under ranged. You can't see them any better with the sniper rifle than you can with the assault rifle. And the range on the assault rifles is ridiculous. The AK is NOT an accurate weapon in RL, but I consistently got killed from long distance and I couldn't even see them with my sniper scope. But it's a game and I don't put a whole lot of credence in that.

In the end, I think the visibility is so realistic that I think it's difficult to play at times. And you better have good resolution and no lag on your display. Or you are going to die. A lot...

Q

TrojanTeacher
10-13-2010, 04:48 PM
I'm an MP Fanboy, and will buy/play any game, anytime, as long as at least one or two of my MP peeps are doing the same! I will be on tonight and hopefully be able to provide a comprehensive review in the AM.

In that case, pick up NHL 11 and NCAA 11 STAT!!!

TrojanTeacher
10-14-2010, 01:52 PM
NO?

Retro
10-14-2010, 02:00 PM
NO?
Daylite is not being a true Canadian here, he should be playing hockey damn it! I know he has the beer drinking down.

Of course he is most likely a Senators fan so... probably is a little scared to play. :-"

DayliteMag
10-14-2010, 02:09 PM
I'm an MP Fanboy, and will buy/play any game, anytime, as long as at least one or two of my MP peeps are doing the same! I will be on tonight and hopefully be able to provide a comprehensive review in the AM.

In that case, pick up NHL 11 and NCAA 11 STAT!!!

I've never played any sport-type games (unless you count Duck Hunt or Wii fishing). I'm affraid I would suck big time if I jumped on the virtual ice with you pros. Wouldn't mind trying it out, but I honestly don't see myself giving up FPS games and don't have the time to play more than one at any given point.

TrojanTeacher
10-14-2010, 02:22 PM
Daylite, you a hockey fan? If so, the game is almost already learned for you, the controls take some time to get use to, but trust me, I'm not pro...but Retro is a hockey hacker...I know it. //thread hijack off

Psalm
10-14-2010, 03:18 PM
Wife told me I should go buy this game...she saw a commercial and thought it looked good. I am thinking about it. But, the reviews have me doubting whether I'll like it or not. Hell I haven't played any games in almost a week...so. maybe I would be jsut wasting money till Black Ops comes out....hmmm

Borlaxx
10-14-2010, 03:19 PM
Wife told me I should go buy this game...she saw a commercial and thought it looked good. I am thinking about it. But, the reviews have me doubting whether I'll like it or not. Hell I haven't played any games in almost a week...so. maybe I would be jsut wasting money till Black Ops comes out....hmmm
ModNation Racers

ustolemygmrtag
10-14-2010, 03:55 PM
Wife told me I should go buy this game...she saw a commercial and thought it looked good. I am thinking about it. But, the reviews have me doubting whether I'll like it or not. Hell I haven't played any games in almost a week...so. maybe I would be just wasting money till Black Ops comes out....hmmm
Well, I was disappointed the night I got it. But, it is starting to grow on me. I like the game, and the SP is good. MP needs allot of patches, but is still fun, if you get into the right games types. There is a very steep learning curve for the MP. You will be very aggravated, and rage quit allot the 1st couple of days. But, if you stick it out, you will start to have allot of fun.

When they patch the party/squad problems, I think this game will be a keeper. Until then, buy it only if you have the money to burn.

\

TrojanTeacher
10-14-2010, 04:15 PM
You will be very aggravated, and rage quit allot the 1st couple of days. But, if you stick it out, you will start to have allot of fun.

It's like taking nut shots repeatedly. It will hurt at first, but once the swelling kicks in, you won't feel a thing.

Borlaxx
10-14-2010, 04:21 PM
You will be very aggravated, and rage quit allot the 1st couple of days. But, if you stick it out, you will start to have allot of fun.

It's like taking nut shots repeatedly. It will hurt at first, but once the swelling kicks in, you won't feel a thing.
Funny, that is how I described the process of becoming an admin to you.

Psalm
10-14-2010, 04:32 PM
MNR FTW?

Jackie R
10-14-2010, 04:50 PM
MNR FTW?
Absolutely! :-bd

TrojanTeacher
10-14-2010, 04:56 PM
You will be very aggravated, and rage quit allot the 1st couple of days. But, if you stick it out, you will start to have allot of fun.

It's like taking nut shots repeatedly. It will hurt at first, but once the swelling kicks in, you won't feel a thing.
Funny, that is how I described the process of becoming an admin to you.

It was a welcomed activity!

ustolemygmrtag
10-14-2010, 05:03 PM
It was a welcomed activity!
You masochist you. :devil:

ProfUnderDog
10-14-2010, 05:22 PM
You will be very aggravated, and rage quit allot the 1st couple of days. But, if you stick it out, you will start to have allot of fun.

It's like taking nut shots repeatedly. It will hurt at first, but once the swelling kicks in, you won't feel a thing.

=)) =)) =))

wilmh
10-16-2010, 07:11 PM
My review.

I had planned on buying MOH, but after the negative reviews I decided to just rent the game for the weekend to check it out.

Overall, the campaign is good although short. I played on the Medium setting and was able to complete the game yesterday afternoon (in under 5 hours while taking my time). Multi-player can be fun, but frustrating due to spawn sniping and crappy teammates.

Positives
Good graphics throughout both campaign and multiplayer.
Story is good for campaign.
Multi-player can be fun once you get the hang of the maps
The "war" (I can't remember the gametype name, but you have like 5 areas that you either defend or attack to win the game) game is fun.


Negatives
Long disk startup/beginning menu
Clunky menus can be hard to navigate
Hard to know when you reach a mid level "checkpoint" in the campaign in case you want to turn the game off and know that you won't have to replay some fight scenes again.
Buggy/Glitchy times where the game would pause for a second in the middle of a battle. (both campaign and multiplayer - could be the game, my PS3, or network connection)
Multiple "hits" required for a kill in the campaign even at center mass with an assult rifle at close range.
Short campaign
I didn't mind the lack of a mini-map, but the HUD always turning itself off was annoying.
Some of the Tier 1 challenges are still locked although I've beaten the locked stages in the campaign multiple times and didn't miss any checkpoints.
Difficult to manage "game chat" while in multiplayer
Lack of ability to mute individual people in multiplayer
Spawn sniping in multiplayer
Quick kills with high damage in multiplayer (especially in comparison to the campaign).
No kill-cam after you die in multiplayer
"Leader list" does not register any of my stats for the "world"rankings.
Only one of my friends is listed on the leader list. (including all of you who are playing the game)
Lack of ability to create a party to play with friends on the same team.
Many times in multiplayer, I would play the same map multiple games in a row
etc...



IMO, this is a good game to rent, but I don't have any plans to purchase.

unich
10-17-2010, 12:25 PM
I have Medal Of Honor that's only been in the x-box one time for $38 tyd. I've decided that i'm going to invest my time and $ into vietnam when it comes out. Pm me if interested