Medal of Honor Review Importance – Marathon Not A Sprint

 

By Posted 13 Oct 2010, 10:24

The much anticipated reboot of Medal of Honor was released yesterday, and a number of bad reviews have had an effect on EA shares. The game developer was certainly shocked by poor review scores and deiced to comment on the situation.

After reading over what Electronics Arts said in the statement, it seems as though they are confused as to why the media and consumer has not give the game a chance. EA also points to the fact that Medal of Honor has not had a new version for three years now, so this new reboot is just the first step in a host of new games.

Also See: Angel Di Maria in a Man Utd shirt teased

You have to agree with them on that part; in the few years that the Medal of Honor franchise has been in the wilderness gaming has moved on – you only need to look at games such as Modern Warfare 2 to understand what I mean.

After EA had read those negative reviews and seen their shares fall by as much as $1.05 yesterday, they felt it important to say, “This is a marathon not a sprint -– today’s Medal of Honor launch represents a step forward in that race.” Read the statement on LA Times.

Do you agree with EA? Will you give Medal of Honor a chance, or have the poor reviews persuaded you otherwise?

  • mark standing

    EA said “This is a marathon not a sprint -– today’s Medal of Honor launch represents a step forward in that race.”

    Well guess what – if they had three years in the 'wilderness' since their last game, then they certainly had time to complete their marathon.

    And us gamers are not here just so we can be sold £40 for a disc containing programming that is is not advanced enough yet.

    I'm sorry, but if the best you can say about your product is that it's a 'step forward in the race', then please, don't release the product, go back to the drawing board, and produce something that's WORTH PEOPLE SPENDING THEIR MONEY ON.

    • Khaled

      you took the words right out of my mouth, literally :)

  • Dennis Y

    Despite the bad reviews, I decided to give this game a shot and threw down the $60. And I was severely disappointed. The single-player mode seems completely unrealistic and poorly-programmed, which I wouldn't mind so much if all of their advertisements hadn't emphasized how ground-breaking and realistic the game was going to be. Even worse, the multiplayer is literally unplayable for me, as the client locks up and runs extremely slowly both in-game and even in the menus.

    I grew up on MOHAA, and loved spearhead and breakthrough, but Medal of Honor 2010 has been a huge disappointment for me. I'm hoping EA will fix the bugs with multiplayer so I can actually play online, but I have a feeling that's going to take a while. I've owned this game for 6 hours and I'm already having buyer's remorse.

  • Alan Malik

    I think EA's comments are pathetic. How do they expect us to feel after telling us that MOH is'nt up to scratch beacuse they hav'nt done a game for three years and who cares if this is the first step in a host of new games, l want to buy this game NOW not wait another year for their next title. Sorry EA but will be taken this back for a refund, so gutted l waited this long for nothing!

    • Manram

      Have you even played the game? This game is great. Your probably a gamer that calls himself a gamer but puts the same Modern Warfare 2 disk in every night. Try Medal of Honor first. Im not saying its a MW2 killer but it still a lot of fun.

  • dmattix

    Stop being a bitch buy it, rent it, or borrow it from a friend. try it out before you knock it jackass. don't believe the bs of other peoples opinions.

  • Richard

    personally i think this game was good. now in saying that yes graphics was not up to par with MW2. same time i dont want to have the same gameplay feel as MW2 this game was a breath of fresh air from battlefield and MW2. the story was line and how it all fail together was smooth and on a realistic level as of how mission and attack orders are done in real world. every body wants realistic games but have no tru understanding of real. so instead of saying hey i like a realistic game say NO i want to see the blockbuster effect game. ive notice every ones going thier way to how they pertain war is in real life in the video games they play. IM a wounded vet served in Iraq blown up with a RKG gernade but i love me sum video games still lol. just my thoughts

    • Andrew

      Thank you for serving this great country of ours.

  • dopeboy

    i think the campain is epic but the online is a major fall down. i was expecting something more like bc2 multiplayer

  • Binford

    i found it to be lots of fun and was very immersed in it. all of the missions i've played so far are pretty to look at and the weapons and vehicles are cool. if you want extreme realism then join the army…last time i checked, these games are for entertainment purposes only. i've only played the campaign and not the multiplayer but i'm impressed with what i've seen so far.

  • peep

    you say a breathe of fresh air from battlefield lmao it is the same same developer same feel same everything I'll stick with BFBC2.

  • RREK

    I enjoyed the campaign, really good fun and the Apache attack felt really new exciting. Looking forward to some online play tomorrow.

  • GameAddicto

    I got the game few days ago, one word: fantastic!!!! The shooting's close to real staff, very good audio, graphic is pretty good (not the best) too, fun, will keep me entertained til end of this year. For Multiplayer mode, the graphic and gameplay seems smooth, no glitches, messy battlefield (love it!!!), well organised map. I played all the shooting games before and this, 8/10

    • thefox

      great game