Medal of Honor Limited Edition reviews

Not spectacular, entertaining at the least, hire it first, you can finish the single player on the hardest setting in under 6 hours. Multiplayer feels unfinished.

Would have been a good game if this was released in November 2007 to compete with COD4. Who knows the world might have been a different place.

I spend alot of time on the battlefield forums. Alot of people are talking of this game not living up to it, apparently the creators have admitted its a failure even.

After Bad Company, have a look at DICE / EA's support record – TERRIBLE. Expect early issues with MOH to be addressed but in 6 months look forward to nasty bugs and glitches that WILL NOT BE FIXED!!

Although it might look all pretty and shiny, this game has nothing attractive to offer. As for the guy comparing it to MW2, I won't even bother… (coming from a guy who KNOWS how successful COD is, but I don't play it)

Suggest renting first.....

Pretty lack luster game really. Didn't even finish the campaign mode, got bored after a while. Multiplayer is bad, small maps, lag, hardly any vehicles and it's shoot die, shoot die, shoot die over and over again.

Whilst the single player campaign was enjoyable it was WAY to short, I finished this in a couple of evenings and I am terrible at shooters so I expect anyone who is half decent will get through it in about 3–4 hours.

A large number of glitches too with this 360 version, sound kept cutting out on the quad bike mission, and a few graphics issues here and there.

Definitely not the highly polished product we've all come to expect from major developers. The multiplayer is ok but its a bit like pulling a wheelie on your bike – its cool and fun the first couple of times but pretty soon you can do it blindfolded whilst yawning, we've had these MP style games for a while now and the novelty is wearing off… I'll remain in hope that COD Black Ops will be something different and reinvigorate my love of FPS games.

If you like Battlefield Bad company 2 with smaller maps, underpowered assualt and spec ops classes not to mention not enough variety in general then this is the game for you.

The single player campaign was pretty good but as I expected it was too short. There is nowhere near enough maps to play in multiplayer, not enough weapon variety and it gets very repetitive, very quickly.

All this game is online is a big sniper battle/spawn massacre and It was a waste of money in my opinion…

SAVE THE $$$ FOR BLACK OPS…which I ordered from Mightyape because they are great so buy Black Ops now =D

This best thing in my opinion is that you can actually drive and use vehicles on MOH so the maps as a result are much bigger so all players weather snipers or assault have a good map to play on unlike COD where the maps a really small

Medal of honor has disappointed me. On the first mission I shot a wall. – no bullet holes Then I shot a window – no glass broke Time to launch a hallfire missile -tanks glitched behind a cliff

The graphics seem very last generation (direct x 9) Not the greatest…definitely not game of the year.

I rate 3 stars because I like dusty. He has style

I bought this game (for Xbox 360) at Harvey Norman on the day of its release in New Zealand (15th Friday October 2010). I completed the single player campaign by Sunday on the hardest difficulty level (note I was doing other things in the weekend besides just playing this game).

Medal of Honor does not have a ‘veteran’ difficulty level like that of the Call of Duty games, so ironically, I found MOH: Airborne (2007) to be more difficult, and COD 4:MW, World at War and COD: MW2 are much more harder to complete on the veteran difficulty levels. And I would know; I own all of the above + more!

FPS players, I think, should buy this game; it is good, but not great. It is definitely better than a-lot of other FPS games that aren't worth mentioning (e.g. Rogue Warrior…). It's obviously made by Danger Close of EA and the multiplayer is done by DICE of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 fame. Any glitches or bugs are their responsibility to deal with so I wouldn't start panicking about that just yet.

Like the last reviewer, I too felt that the level ‘Breaking Bagram’ etc reminded me of Bad Company 1 & 2 but that is a given due to the above credits and not necessarily a terrible thing.

Danger Close and DICE are responsible for the single player and multiplayer engines, respectively, so obviously the fine tune details like breaking windows, weapon styles/appearances, maps etc isn't gonna be like Modern Warfare 2 (which I have and play online usually).

I think this is a competent, sturdy, worth-the-purchase FPS game. The conflict: the US-led war in Afghanistan is indeed nothing to smile about, a war for oil, but hey this is just a game, not the real thing! If you can afford it, buy it. Then next month COD: Black Ops!!!

I say again, quite good, but not great. Remember EA are following up MOH: Vanguard (PS2) and MOH: Airborne (Xbox 360/PS3) both done in 2007, and abit dated with the WW2 stuff, whereas Activision's In­finity Ward and Treyarch are following up on COD 4 MW (2007) & MW2 (2009), & World at War (2008). These are good times for FPS gamers!!! See you online…

C.R.

“Kick that sh#t in Deuce”

The command every man wants to hear when standing in front of a door that blocks your path. Medal of Honor “The Reboot” is certainly what it sets out to be, an ‘authentic’ shooter, its not a sim, but it aims to take you to the gritty battlefields in the current day conflict that is Afghanistan. I for one was really looking forward to it and unfortunately its a very mixed bag.

You play the majority of the game as Tier 1 operators, the best of the best military operators working inside enemy territory out numbered with only your skills etc etc… Then later you hit the dusty hills in the boots of a Army Ranger, the whole time being bombarded with great sound effects, radio chatter and acronyms ripped straight from the source material.

Right, the first and most important thing in a FPS, the shooting is solid, in fact the opening sequence I squeezed off a few rounds from my M4 and thought, that sounds just right. An M4 is one of the few assault rifles I have actually fired regularly and the sound designers got it spot on. I also like the ability to change from full auto to semi automatic firing if you so desire, once again full-filling the “realistic itch” I like in shooters. The game has a slide to cover mechanic and lean mechanic which I used once, thought that it was cool and never used it again, even when playing on hard (which is not hard enough). All your time is spent in the dusty buildings and mountains which characterized the early battles of Afghanistan, but the developers did well do give you a good mix of locales and gameplay to keep the painfully short campaign fresh. Everything from hitting people over 1000 yards away with a sniper rifle to being the gunner in an Apache chopper or riding an ATV.

Its just the huge amount of little things that stops this being in the company of other Tier 1 games. For example, The odd AI partner getting stuck in a door or when an enemy spawn points are painfully obvious. In the sniping sequences there is no need to allow for windage and drop which was disappointing, but boy what satisfying hits, talk about early Peter Jackson “Bad Taste” effects, with chicken jibblits bits flying every where. There is the standard paint the laser on target for bombs etc.. Which was very tick the box, the enemy AI is not up to snuff on occasion and the obligatory army story of a General “back home” with no understanding what is in front of the boots on the ground, its probably based in truth but its has soo been done before. I would still say though these together are not complete game breakers, just frustrating.

Graphically it has some very high points and real low points. In spots the game has some of the best looking, most intense battles I have played in a while, then you see a truck blow up or some texture pop-in and you are ripped out of the situation, thinking, damn that was half-assed. Funnily I think the game looks better the further in you get into it as does the mission quality. The lack of camera control in cut scenes left me feeling “trapped” in the moment, especially when compared to that epic opening sequence to CoD4 which was brilliant.

Now you can't talk modern day shooter without pulling in the powerhouse that is the Infinity Ward Call of Duty's and doing a side by side. I did this and it is glaringly obvious that MW2 has a longer, better looking campaign, awesome MP and the best bit of all Co-Op Spec Ops. BUT MoH still grabbed me for some reason, I respect what the Danger Close guys were trying to do. They set out NOT to make that Michael Bay big budget, low integrity pop-corn fest. They tried to give us “the civies”, a glimpse of what these modern soldiers face, while still making it entertaining and I think they succeeded.

My final thoughts are, a 5 maybe 6 hour campaign is criminal if there is nothing else to fluff up the pillow, I hated the limited MP from DICE, mainly because its tacked on and I sucked at it and there is no Co-Op anything. That being said, as soon as I finished the first play through of the Campaign, I started again without hesitation. I would advise waiting for a bargain bin buy or Rent it for a night, because there are better games and overall packages out there, however Medal of Honor does one important thing very well for us military shooter fans, its believable.

Comments and feedback are always welcome!!

Its definitely worth buying this game especially if u dont want to spend heaps of money buying black ops its cheap and has amazing graphics the campaigns really fun and online is awesome. There's some really cool guns and theres heaps of buildings and rooftops in this game that you can get to for great sniping.

I rented this game for two days. I finished the single player which I enjoyed. However I could not play multiplayer as there was only 1–2K online, cod WAW has more which has been out for two years! Unless you want to play the campaign over and over again, do not buy.

Wow!? After so much debate over calling the OPPOSITION the TALIBAN in the MULTIPLAYER… This game finally sees the light of day. But does it shine?

Visuals: 4/5 Using the latest in the UNREAL 3.5 engine I'd expect nothing other than greatness-ness from this I.P Your fellow troops look very life-like and so do the weapons! After the first explosion let-alone gun shot you'll be hooked into the visual and visceral piece of eye candy! But it does have its drawbacks… Watch out for “Puddle” and “Scope” reflections the buildings AREN'T THERE (you'll see)

Sound 3/5 “He's over there!?” where? thats the question you'll be asking when your friendly soldiers try to inform you where the enemy is… The BANG of the guns and bombs sound very beefy through the 5.1, let alone from the TV speakers… But I must expose… A .50 calibure round will leave you drooling, knowing a well placed shot is the END ALL for you're intended target.

Controls: 5/5 It's a pick-up and play, after the recent influx of C.O.D games EA decided to allow for your own customisation (to a point) but still very easy to get into and start shooting.

Gameplay 2/5 There IS a story behind this title and it shows through the gameplay and cut scenes, however you'll probebly find more gore and better handling in Soldier Of Fortune: Payback… Yes this game has Aiming down the Sight, dismemberment (1 Per victim) and big guns… But its just another shooter… There is NO back story behind your character let alone much Morality which should be deserved in such a title as this…

Overall 3/5 Great game… Worthy of anyones collection and definate replay value, shunned down by par story telling and small glitches.

Despite all the hype and controversy around the “Taliban”, MOH fails to deliver. Campaign mode is excellent and fun to play. Extremely realistic, about 5 hours gametime. But Multiplayer really disappoints. Graphics and action are good, very realistic, maybe too realistic. Despite playing for hours, I hardly got any kills. The kills I got very mostly accidental. Most annoying is the involuntary melee attack while shooting. The melee is so sensitive that in the heat of a fire fight it goes off and you get killed.

All in all, it is quite good, but I quickly git bored, especially no Free-for-all mode, no killcam.

I sold it off pretty quickly and invested the money into Black Ops

Picked it up this morning and have spent most of the day playing it. It is worth the money for this game. Don't know how it will compare with the new call of duty but it should be good. One downside for me is that it feel a little too much like bad company 2. The cut scenes are wicked. The gameplay get more intense as the game goes on. Buy the way, the ac130 appears to fly WAY to slow.

I have only just started playing this game and think its great. This is a keeper this game. Try it for yourselves. Its worth it

They have merged the awesome battlefield bad company multiplayer with COD. The result is an amazing multiplayer experience. However there are many mixed reviews. I love this game but many of my friends hate it. I would recommend to anybody wanting to buy it to rent it out first or borrow it from a friend because this seems like one of those games that are very opinion based.

I bought this game (for Xbox 360) at Harvey Norman on the day of its release in New Zealand (15th Friday October 2010). I completed the single player campaign by Sunday on the hardest difficulty level (note I was doing other things in the weekend besides just playing this game).

Medal of Honor does not have a ‘veteran’ difficulty level like that of the Call of Duty games, so ironically, I found MOH: Airborne (2007) to be more difficult, and COD 4:MW, World at War and COD: MW2 are much more harder to complete on the veteran difficulty levels. And I would know, I own all of the above + more!

FPS players, I think, should buy this game, it is good, but not great. It is definitely better than a-lot of other FPS games that aren't worth mentioning (e.g. Rogue Warrior, ..). Its obviously made by Danger Close of EA and the multiplayer is done by DICE of Battlefield: Bad Company 2 fame. Any glitches or bugs are their responsibility to deal with so I wouldn't start panicking about that just yet.

Like the last reviewer, I too felt that the level ‘Breaking Bagram’ etc reminded me of Bad Company 1 & 2 but that is a given due to the above credits and not necessarily a terrible thing.

Danger Close and DICE are responsible for the single player and multiplayer engines, respectively, so obviously the fine tune details like breaking windows, weapon styles/appearances, maps etc isn't gonna be like Modern Warfare 2 (which I have and play online usually).

I think this is a competent, sturdy, worth-the-purchase FPS game. The conflict: the US-led war in Afghanistan is indeed nothing to smile about, a war for oil, but hey this is just a game, not the real thing! If you can afford it, buy it. Then next month COD: Black Ops!!!

I say again, quite good, but not great. Remember EA are following up MOH: Vanguard (PS2) and MOH: Airborne (Xbox 360/PS3) both done in 2007, and abit dated with the WW2 stuff, whereas Activision's In­finity Ward and Treyarch are following up on COD 4 MW (2007) & MW2 (2009), & World at War (2008). These are good times for FPS gamers!!! See you online…

C.R.

An expected experience based on pre-release published info about the game. Investment on the user's single campaign experience could have been greater. While full of fun it isn't that long and not very challenging – more story book than game but parts of it rocked! One piece had a pretty unique feeling of impending doom while pinned inside a small hut with ‘opposing forces’ rain down some hate. Multiplayer can sometimes feel manic but seems pretty steady and reliable thus far (others may beg to differ). Maps in death match feel a little on the claustrophobic side at times and the sniper spec is really for the people who are only interested in increasing their individual scores but don't want to actually play the game – a little overpowered IMHO (again others will beg to differ). On the whole the overall game experience is a home run but us picky gamers are really looking for something out of the ball park.

They have certainly improved the multi-player, looks great,feels good and best of all I haven't experienced much lag. I love the hardcore gaming type it plays through all game modes(Combat Mission, Team Assault, Sector Control, Objective Raid) the only down side if you can call it that No Map. You can also play each game mode individual too.

Overall campaign not the best, finished on hard under 5 hours but the online multi-player 7/10.

This is a definite buy…

I m also new to Medal of Honor. The only FPS war-game I played was Modern Warfare2. Graphic is pretty much similar to MW2. I never play multiplayer online mode, so I don't know how good/bad this game is, and as for the single player campaign, this game is quite ok. The only thing I like about this type of FPS war-game is because of sniper rifle. That's the only thing I mostly carry around if there is any available.

Decent ok shooter.

Great graphics and game play

I only played the single player campaign as multi player doesn't appeal to me. I have to say it's as if the single player campaign was added just so they wouldn't be lying when they said there was one. It's really short. You could play it easily in a day, almost in a single session. There's no protagonist or story really. The action takes place in a couple of generic battles in Afghanistan and the perspective jumps between three special forces soldiers for most of the game (and in one particularly awesome section the gunner of an Apache helicopter), which is something I personally don't like. I'd feel more immersed in the game if I was playing one guy. The setting and situation is the only realistic aspect of the game, everything else is pure shooter; auto health regeneration, absurd ammo carrying capacity, armies of enemies that you cut through as a scythe through wheat and the ever popular checkpoint save system.

The gameplay is very heavily scripted, so much so that you feel like you're in a blockbuster action movie. Most of the time you fight alongside squad mates and there's always someone telling you what to do and where to go, so basically all you do is go where they tell you, and shoot when and at whom they tell you. It works well but coupled with the fact that the levels are so restrictive and linear it's like you're on rails, just running along and shooting as scripted events unfold around you. At times it's undeniably awesome but it gets to be too much. It's like that constantly and although it was awesome at first I found it soon got quite tiresome.

The game focuses very heavily on action. There are one or two quieter sections where you can use stealth but most of the time its nonstop, intense action battling through wave after wave of enemies.

Graphics, sound, voice acting, animations and gun play are all very good.

I did manage to finish the campaign but only because it was so short. Half way through it I was more or less thoroughly bored. I think back to Medal of Honor Allied Assault and I lament at how far this series has fallen.