Medal of Honor reviews are go, Eurogamer gives 8/10

IncGamers has gone live now as well.

Video review of ‘Medal of Honor’

>>> http://www.looki.de/medal_of_honor_singleplayer_videoreview_a4638_1.html

What’s the score on that video? Is there one?

Nope, there are no servers for multiplayer online yet, so they’ve decided to review the SP part and wait for the full multiplayer component… sounds like a score between 70 and 75. Btw. campaign only lasts around six hours. :-/

OK, thanks.

@4 – so about the same length as COD then

this shouldn’t be the standard

Yeah as i said before, Multiplayer is broken, don’t know about singleplayer yet.

Pat, how come VG247 don’t review games?

I’d happily do it for you

Some pro’s and cons of Looki’s video review

Pro
- campaign rich in variety
- nice CG cutscenes
- decent production
- proper gunplay
- mainly respectable graphics
- awesome sound effects and score

Contra
- short singleplayer campaign (around 6 hours)
- ending is disappointing
- huge load of scripts, some bugs
- very linear
- almost no replayability
- tactical moments doesn’t really exist
- exaggerated patriotism isn’t bearable
- AI with some problems

http://www.ingame.de/home/56235/medal-of-honor-review/

same thing with the MP, no servers :/ SP Score – 8.2

Isn’t it ‘rather silly’ to be reviewing a game such as this without taking the multiplayer component into account? What next, reviewing the demo because “the full game’s not out until next month”?

@12: They said they will review the MP separately as soon as the servers are online. But yeah you’re right I prefer complete reviews too.

@12:

Yeah, right… give credit to all other reviews who haven’t even played the FULL multiplayer component… *facepalm*
It’s more honest to provide thoughts of the campaign and WAIT before putting a critic of the multiplayer part online.

All the other reviews refer to the closed and open beta sessions. That’s “rather silly”

I wasn’t giving credit to *any* of the reviews – it’s obvious that none of this batch of reviews have played the final multiplayer component.

It was the same with the Halo Reach reviews, if you remember. Only Edge held out to play the full thing (and they don’t usually bother doing that either). Something is a bit broken in review-o-land, and seems to be getting more broken by the year.

All they want is clicks, and this fast.

@M2Kx:

And I guess you posted the link to Ingame.de only because you’re an unselfish Samaritan?

I was actually referring to this:

“Only Edge held out to play the full thing (and they don’t usually bother doing that either). Something is a bit broken in review-o-land, and seems to be getting more broken by the year.”

here’s one more, SP only again:

http://www.gameswelt.de/articles/reviews/6746-Medal_of_Honor/result.html

Consoles: 76% PC: 79%

No other reviews yet, but I guess I’ve seen enough already

strange to review half a game – i´ll wait for full reviews – mp inclusive. it´s a joke to review a game whith a big focus on mp without even reviewing the mp…makes zero sense….time wasted…

77% from an Xbox Fanzine? Really?

I thought those guys weren’t allowed to hand out anything below a 9. Or maybe they didn’t get EAs check in the mail.

I would’ve thought it would be scoring higher than that, to be honest. The trailers looked amazing.

So much for the CoD-killer I guess. Buy a few more FPS studios Ricitiello, quantity is always the answer.

German Gamepro: 75%

http://www.gamepro.de/test/spiele/xbox360/ego-shooter/medal_of_honor_test/1967483/medal_of_honor_test_p4.html

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-10-12-medal-of-honor-review

it’s an 8

What’s up with Eurogamer of late? Their review scores appear to be ‘in the same region’ as everyone else’s.

RPS has gone up as well. Looks as though it’s free-for-all time.

@15
What’s betting that EDGE review this straight away, thus proving their bias. If they are going to give Halo:Reach a full week to try everything, surely they should do that for every game?

id like an epic single player experience ffs. i guess ill have to wait for brothers in arms. Won’t be gettin this. I guess they havn’t stuck with the roots of the series, im pretty sure past MOH games were longer than 6 hrs!

@25, I wouldn’t go so far as to call it ‘bias’, but in general I wouldn’t argue with that opinion. It’ll be interesting to see what they do with Black Ops.

Sounds like its crap.
especially the RPS one .

@23 Chuckle chuckle

What’s interesting is that people write things that differ so immensely.

RPS is on about being a spectator, whereas Eurogamer lauds the intense combat experience. So which is it? Are you on the sideline or are you in the thick of it?

I think there’s a lot of good stuff there, though. I was annoyed by the lack of a lean function in the MW2 singeplayer (I think leaning in multiplayer would take away from the action) but Danger Close seem to be on top of that.

Kinda scary how much the menus look like MW2 though, judging from the RPS screenshot.

@26 It’s only 6 hours? Jebus.

BoomtownX 6/10 (SP Only)
http://www.boomtownx.net/medal-of-honor-review

@DSB

All big budget shooters are 6 hours long these days.

@31 Really? I guess I haven’t really kept count.

If that’s the case, they need a serious online contingent. I haven’t seen the final Medal of Honor, but 3 static classes and a levelling system that appears picked out of Bad Company 2 seems a little scarce to me. Correct me if I’m wrong.

Once Bad Company 2 had been fully unlocked I didn’t see any point in playing on – Just for a platinum star on my rifle? Fuck that shit.

quite the underachiever aye?
O well. Ill still get it. It looked fun and the Beta was decent

Games.cz 7/10 http://games.tiscali.cz/recenze/medal-of-honor-recenze-53916

Hrej.cz 7/10 http://www.hrej.cz/recenze/medal-of-honor-3312/

The ‘Wot I Think’ from RPS is up now too :

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/10/12/wot-i-think-medal-of-honour/

It wouldn’t matter if the game was handed a 9+/10. Not enough gamers will put down CoD, BFBC2, or Halo to make this game stick around.

If someone wanted to make a play for the a piece of the Online Shooter crown, I would suggest dropping the MRSP by 20%, and advertise your putting out DLC for FREE.

Otherwise why would most people want to invest in this game, when they are perfectly happy with the ones they already have that do the same thing.

Over crowded and over priced, DLC heavy, marketplace already. Good luck MoH, you’ll need it.

DSB is surprised that it has 6 hour campaign, where MW2 his favourite piece of… had only 4-5 at best. Every blockbuster FPS have campaign of 4-6 hours. Uncharted 2 with it’s 10 hours is just an exception.

But to be serious, i’m not sure if MOH 6 hours. I think i can do it much faster. The AI in this game is such a waste. AI of your team and enemy AI are just bullshit. I finished like 3 missions and never died once. So easy.

Mr. Garratt where can I sign the petition for the “ignore”-button already?

Erth, I’m going to say this politely… Shut up, please.

You’re criticising DSB’s posts when there’s there not even anything to criticise. You’re arguing with him just because it’s him saying it. It is seriously tiresome and it’s ruining perfectly decent threads.

Kotaku’s is there.

Feelin’ the love.

I really dislike the new Kotaku review template, I liked the whole “pros” and “cons” thing they had going before. The new one is way too rigid.

@37 Given that Medal of Honor hasn’t been defined as being either a multiplayer or a singleplayer game, and the fact that the lead studio only had to worry about creating the singleplayer, I’m surprised that they seem to be following the template of more dedicated multiplayer shooters, like Bad Company 2 or Modern Warfare 2.

Hence the “It’s only 6 hours?” – That’s taken one AAA studio two years to do. Six hours of content.

@8: Yes, we get it, you played a BETA and think that it was broken. I don’t agree. If it was it was probably fixed by now, if not, DICE will release some patches. So there is no problem.

@41: Yeah, i agree, the new review template is just annoyingly stupid. But i don’t think they’ll change it.

@41 Agreed – Liked Kotaku’s old system better. But then again, at least they’re doing things differently.

For me, Gaston’s (Videogamer) review is definitely the most comprehensive of the bunch. Suggest people check that out.

IGN UK give’s a 6.

A 6.

GiantBomb 3/5 http://www.giantbomb.com/medal-of-honor/61-29336/reviews/

Gamer.no gave it a 6/10.

http://gamer.no/artikler/72117/anmeldelse-medal-of-honor/

VGD! Single! Player! Review! Excellence! Scorelessness! I’m hungry!

http://videogamesdaily.com/reviews/201010/medal-of-honor-review-part-1-the-campaign/

Just to clarify people…

That is NOT IGN UK’s score/review. It’s the US review (Arthur Gles is based in the US office).

I don’t think the UK team is doing a review, which is quite a shame really since well, unlike their US counterparts, they actually write good reviews.

@44 mathare thx for the tip. Didnt knew Gaston and it was a really good read.
@49 because IGN is so confusing with all their damn sites. IGN DE gave a7.5 btw. Yet the review is based on the PC version and campaign only… And written by a german.

Sry, Edited this comment a 100 times…