Medal of Honor: Warfighter review cites Frostbite 2 failings

By Updated on

We told you that there were early warning signs for Medal of Honor Warfighter when the first initial reviews went up last week, but now the one review that everyone was waiting for has been published and it basically rips into the game even more.

A few days ago, we informed you that the likes of Eurogamer and Destructoid had both given Medal of Honor: Warfighter a less than impressive 5/10 score. Now, IGN has gone live with their own review score and we’re afraid to say that it isn’t pretty indeed, with an even worse 4/10 score and a scathing review on how the game is basically a waste of time and fails to deliver in almost all aspects of the game.

In a review that really cuts close to the bone, IGN has stated that Warfighter is ‘disrespectful of your time’ and that the core design of the game is ‘deeply problematic’, with significant ‘technical issues’. With references to disappearing player models, sound crashes akin to that of Battlefield 3 and a ‘tanking’ framerate, it really does look like Danger Close and EA have released something of a clanger here and we are finding it hard to see where they can recover from this, with future titles in mind when EA cannot release a new BF game every year.

Perhaps even more eye raising is the fact that IGN also makes a bold statement by saying that Medal of Honor: Warfighter is the first Frostbite 2 game which ‘fails to function at a basic level’. We all know that Battlefield 3 has set the standard so far, but is it worrying to see the next Frostbite 2 game after BF3 getting ripped apart so badly? It’s fair to say that EA will secretly be hurting over all of the criticism, maybe even a little shocked too.

If you have already picked up your copy of Medal of Honor, let us know if you agree with the harsh review scores that have been dished out online. Is Warfighter really a lazy effort from Danger Close and EA, or is it still worth the $60?

Also See: Origin down with EA servers on Nov 23

  • ELDiablo2531

    ign is a crappy review site, this game is worth more than a 4. ign gave that p.o.s. brink a 6 and it didnt even have a single player in my eyes. gave mw3 a 9.5!? wtf to that. getting good with the slide and lean controls is a fun and exciting time. no game as of late has incorporated lean and slide features soooooo yeah. graphics are good not great, sound is awesome, not as good as bf3 but better than everything else! danger close deserves more credit/respect than what these reviews have given. sounds like to me ign and others are out to shun anything to maximize consumer dollars towards black ops 2 or halo ( i know thats extreme) it just seems like these people played a different game than my friends and i did.

    • James

      No, you just have terrible taste in games.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=615955135 Admir Karalic

        You can’t judge on someones taste for games. Of course we are different, but the facts are here showing that the Game is awfull. I bought it too, but from EB GAMES, they have a promotion called play for 1 $/day, I hated it so much that I sold it back the other day for 57 $ + tx. and just payed off my halo 4 LE edition. MoH was okay in terms of what new game play style and maps it provides. I realy loved to rush the enemy with my squad mate, too bad that the Squads are only made of 2 persons and not 4 like on BF3 :S. But on the other hand the game is laggy as hell, I was many times stuck on the respawn menu wich forces you to reboot your game. I think this game is cheaply made for 60 $ and would have needed more testing before release. Why do every new company need to release something and then meanwhile patch it –’ ?

    • ThehellkindanameisELDIABLO2531

      The fact that nearly every reviewer has scored this game bad, not just IGN seems to have just flown right over your head hasn’t it?

  • Beowulf2b

    I really do hate playing MOH Warfighter and regret paying $35 for owning BF3 Premium. I have always loved BF games since BF2, even played COD MW and Blackops which get old quick. But I have had a miserable experience with Warfighter on line It feels so confined like a tiny COD map. Can’t even jump on a rock for a good vantage sniping point like on BF3. What is the point of Frostbyte with no destruction and tight boundaries, like climbing rocks etc.

    I give the game 3/10 waste of money.

  • James

    A great engine needs great developers to work with. It’s obvious Danger Close doesn’t know how to use Frostbite 2.

    Second at this point in time it’s damn obvious Frostbite 2 is a next gen engine. The PC Version of MoH has none of those issues and is one of the best looking games released.

    However, the game sucks so who cares.

  • Kyle

    I’ll be honest – I am disappointed I paid the $60 (plus tax) for this before reading reviews. I was legitimately excited for this to come out. However, the game itself is lacking in so many areas.

    IGN hit it on the head for the most part. The story is so disjointed and all over the place it is hard to keep track of – one mission you’re storming the beaches in Somalia to wiping out what seems to be an entire Filipino village of rebels. What they fail to do is connect the two missions (or even talk about whether or not they’re related at all). I played for roughly two hours and worst of all, it seems I am already at the half way point of the campaign – granted I am playing it on ‘normal’ to get a sense of the story, but I probably would have felt only slightly as ripped off if I played it on hard.

    All in all, I think they’ve stepped back from the 2010 game. While the 2010 game was disappointing for many reasons, what it didn’t lack was a great story that had continuity and some sort of measurable timeline. I remember a few “Oh sh**” moments in it because you were about to be overwhelmed by Taliban fighters while waiting for air support, or one of the more memorable parts was waiting for evac with Rabbit fading away. So far in Warfighter, its just been cliche scripted moment after another, and not to mention what seems to be a rip off of a few COD hallmarks (no, I’m not a COD fanboi). Again I was looking forward to this title a lot and I really wished they had learned lessons from the 2010 release (specifically about the stupidly short campaign), but it seems not.

    My biggest regret is that I didn’t get it on Xbox – that way I could at least trade it back in for Halo 4 or Blackops II.

  • BoD

    Not the best but still stunning to look at in ultra settings on the pc and team death match wether cod, bf3 or moh is team death match. some maps need work but overall i would give it a 7 at present.. one player is no more disjointed then black ops or the cod games but thr atmosphere and graphics are very impressive, just need to replicate some of that into multiplayer. invest some more time ea and make it what it should of been, open up the maps more and add the atmosphere of the single player online and i am there for the long haul. lets see what the 1st update brings. only cost me £ 18 so am not fretting to much :0)

  • Dynasty2201

    Rushed release = shite game.
    Is this so hard to believe?
    Hardly DICE’s engine at fault. BF 3 is fine. Danger Close were clearly forced to release by EA to compete with CoD. Should have released early next year instead to iron out all these laughable faults.
    Just look at the day one patch notes.
    Basically fixes the whole game. The list has some hilarious fixes.
    Oh and IGN is full of crap. They shoot down MoH for repetition, nothing new, laughable AI etc. 4.0.
    Yet CoD Blops 2 will get a 9.
    ***king stupid logic.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=615955135 Admir Karalic

      Yet CoD is more fun even if it is always the same thing. Why ? Well it’s arcade style, anyone can pick it up and the IW or Treyarch know how to make a successfull game that is actualy fun. I in first place am looking for a FUN game then I look for the realisme of it. MoH was everything but fun.