DICE on Medal of Honor: “The controversy did affect some reviews”

Saturday, 6th November 2010 09:54 GMT By Nathan Grayson


Seems like just about everyone – old or young, smart or in love with their caps lock key – has an opinion about EA’s newest entry in its Medal of Honor franchise.

More interesting, however, is the range of opinions about those opinions.

First we had EA Games VP Patrick Soderlund chalking up a tepid reception to unmet quality expectations. Then EA CEO John Ricitiello asserted that, ultimately, a “narrow demographic of reviewers” can rant and rave all they want, but the game wasn’t made for them. And now, DICE’s Patrick Liu has contributed his two cents, explaining that the last-minute Taliban nip-tuck may have been responsible for some bad blood.

“The controversy did affect some reviews,” he told Eurogamer. “It stirs a lot of feelings, just the setting. And that does affect people’s judgment.”

“But otherwise, this is a reboot of a franchise. It’s an investment for EA as a company. We need to build upon what we have achieved so far and improve and build up the franchise again from scratch, basically.”

Of course, controversy’s not solely to blame for Medal of Honor’s occasional visits to some of the review scale’s seedier locales. Liu continued:

“It’s partly because we’re in a very competitive genre. We’re also competing with ourselves. Obviously we’re competing with Call of Duty. It’s a very tricky situation to be squeezed in between those giants.”

“Either the reviews are favourable, or they’re not. There’s nothing in between. It’s polarised opinion about the game.”

More through the link.



  1. Grimrita

    Magazines have been too quick to dish out high scores of late. Most of the games simply do not warrant 9/10 or 10/10.

    It still stuns me, just how many people believe review scores after the whole kane/lynch/eidos/gamespot affair where clearly, money talks.

    #1 4 years ago
  2. chronoss2

    how stupid, it is not because it’s called Medal of Honor that it automatically deserves 10/10. if the game is not that good then it is not.. I had to cancel my pre-order at gamestop right after i played the beta cause i really didnt like it..i thought it was too boring to play and it has almost no difference with Battlefield: BC2, i accuse the laziness of the developpers who just took what existed for BF: BC2.. shameful!

    #2 4 years ago
  3. ThatBoyTim

    Yes there are similarities with BFBC2 but it stands up well as a game. Its not a 10/10 sure but an 8.5 in my mind. The campaign was a little too short and the multiplayer is unbalanced (ie initial weapon loadout is very week and you have to put some time in to get the decent attachments). There’s also a little too mcuh sniping in my mind!

    First post on this website by the way – HI!

    #3 4 years ago
  4. Yoshi

    “But otherwise, this is a reboot of a franchise. It’s an investment for EA as a company. We need to build upon what we have achieved so far and improve and build up the franchise again from scratch, basically.”

    Then STFU with all these excuses and get on with it! *facepalm* It’s excuse after excuse with these recently.

    @3 Welcome :)

    #4 4 years ago
  5. SplatteredHouse

    Most likely, you didn’t release a detailed enough review guide, or you just phoned MoH in, to counter CoD, then got called on it. Cry more! Or, keep kidding yourselves. When the boss man says its not even up to snuff (“Medal of Honor didn’t meet our quality expectations”) then, to be making excuses after the fact, just makes things all the worse, still.

    There’s no use blaming it on any stylistic alterations YOU decided to make, in order to appease your own perception, either! How low! :(

    #5 4 years ago
  6. YoungZer0

    Seriously? The Setting was the best thing about it.

    #6 4 years ago
  7. back_up

    No Dice Laziness in MP affected the review

    #7 4 years ago
  8. Stardog

    EA are fucking desperate. They sound like children trying to defend this PoS game.

    It’s a dumb game for dumb gamers. 0/10.

    #8 4 years ago
  9. Goliath

    “The controversy did affect some reviews”

    Ah . . . no, it didn’t. The game was generic and poorly made. Reviews are right in line with what the game deserves. While I’m not the biggest fan of metacritic what aggregate sites like metacritic and gamesranking give you is consensus on the quality of a game.

    #9 4 years ago
  10. endgame

    @chronoss2 “and it has almost no difference with Battlefield: BC2″ r u kidding me kid? I have played more than 500 hours of bfbc2 and between 12-20 hours of moh and I can tell u it’s different! it’s s**t different. lol! what a f**king mess u r. just crawl back to w/e hole u came out from and never come back. f**king h4te newbies.

    p.s. I’m not praising a game or the other, I’m just saying that they r very different.

    edit: “Seriously? The Setting was the best thing about it.” totally agree with u m8. I loved the single playe part of the game. first time in years it’s not about saving the world but about saving the guy near u.

    also Welcome ThatBoyTim! :)

    edit 2: I’ve just checked metacritic and the game has 74 (PC), 75 (XBOX360) and 75 (PS3). that’s not bad ppl!

    #10 4 years ago
  11. SaintRasmus

    “The controversy did affect some reviews,”

    No it was just a dull game with no visions.

    Lets hope the next one is better.

    #11 4 years ago
  12. reask

    Game was rubbish plain and simple.
    i rented it or a week and brought it back 2 days early.

    Multi is a campers paradise.
    SP is not a game but a tour of Afghanistan been led by the hand throughout.

    Maybe it got harder later on but having played about 6 missions on hardest setting I certainly had no intention of finding out.

    Have played all the MOH and this one is the worst by a country mile.

    #12 4 years ago
  13. chronoss2

    @endgame : hahaha stupid geek !!! no more to add !

    #13 4 years ago
  14. Gazza636

    the multiplayer would have been better if only 4 of the weapon types are allowed,i play combat missions quite alot but the game can be ruined by too many snipers also it gonna cost me another 800 msp to buy the hot zone pack,which is another rip off

    #14 4 years ago
  15. Gekidami

    Yeah, snipers are OP imo, and the sheer number of people playing them for easy kills just ruins the game.

    #15 4 years ago
  16. MM360

    Its an ok game but it could have been better bring on BF3

    #16 4 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.