Bethesda's epic sci-fi RPG is here, and it's a big one. From shipbuilding to exploring the surface of Mars, our thoughts so far.
Starfield Review... In Progress
The first trailer for Grand Theft Auto 6 is finally here.
Grand Theft Auto 6 Trailer
We take an in-depth look at Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora and tell you why it should be heavily on your radar!
Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora - a Deep-Dive into its Potential
Range-wise, the ROG Rapture GT6 is phenomenal, and it's ideal for all gaming and non-gaming-related tasks.
ASUS ROG Rapture GT6 WiFi 6 Mesh System Review
Medal of Honor: Warfighter
Medal of Honor: Warfighter

PC | PlayStation 3 | Xbox 360
Genre: First Person Shooter
Developer: Danger Close Official Site:
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Release Date:
23rd October 2012
Medal of Honor: Warfighter

Genre: First Person Shooter
Developer: Danger Close
Official Site: http://www.medalofhon...
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Release Date:
23rd October 2012
Hide Video Player
Click To View the Medal of Honor: Warfighter Video
Medal of Honor: Warfighter Review
Review By @ 05:25pm 31/10/12
Over the last couple of years it’s become rather trendy for gaming critics to slag off linear first-person shooters. If it’s not being used for a sandbox experiment in emergent gameplay, as seen most recently in Dishonored, the first-person perspective found in rollercoaster shooting galleries is deemed unworthy of gamer attention. I don’t subscribe to that perspective. Walk into any real-life carnival or fairground and you’ll see the most popular attractions are the rollercoaster and shooting gallery, and I think a lot of us find the same enjoyment in blockbusters like Call of Duty or Battlefield. Most gamers like a bit of dumb fun that doesn’t require Mensa-levels of intellect to penetrate, and I was one of the few critics who found the last MoH a decent first-person romp.

With that in mind I had relatively high hopes for Warfighter. After all, based on the many sequels I’ve played over the years, it’s become pretty standard to expect the follow-up to improve on the last game in every way. This is why Warfighter is so baffling – rather than learn from the mistakes of the last game, the latest entry makes an entirely new bunch of SNAFUs that we’d expect from an FNG rather than a combat veteran.

The most concerning is the act of firing the weapons, the most fundamental element of any decent shooter. Warfighter gets a few things right, and one thing spectacularly wrong. Sound effects are inspired by the Hollywood weapons range, with the realistic cap-gun pops and cracks of a real-life weapon replaced by booming Howitzer explosions for even the smallest 9mm handgun. I’m totally fine with that though, as that’s what gamers have been groomed to expect. Feedback from firing is helped no end by the destructible environments delivered by the Frostbite 2.0 engine, though not quite to the same level of Battlefield 3. It looks and sounds great, but aiming itself can only be described as horrific. You see, Warfighter has a very particular issue that is found in very rare cases of terrible coding; when aiming, the crosshair jumps from blocks of pixels to the next, rather than smoothly panning across the screen. It’s hard to explain, so I’ve captured this video of the issue:

Now, I play a LOT of shooters, and none of them exhibit this problem. I fired up Call of Duty and Battlefield immediately after playing Warfighter, and both were as smooth as silk. This jerky movement makes aiming a clumsy affair, and it’s present in both single-player and multiplayer. To get such a fundamental issue so wrong is unforgiveable.

EA made a huge deal about Warfighter being built on Frostbite 2, the same engine used in Battlefield 3, and for good reason – BF3 on the PC is quite possibly the best looking game in existence. Sadly it appears that those good looks are more about the talented folks using the engine to craft a game than the engine itself, as Warfighter doesn’t come close. Some of the single-player sections are relatively impressive, but all too often the player is presented with a tiny area filled with very basic buildings, ignoring the engine’s long draw distance strengths. Occasionally it’s used to serve up a driving level, where the struggling frame-rate indicates a mismatch between developer intent and engine ability. Multiplayer is even more disappointing. It’s uniformly ugly, looking like a very basic console game ported directly to PC, failing to even match the aesthetic appeal of the technologically inferior Call of Duty series.

The lacklustre visuals could be easily ignored in single-player if the gameplay was enough to compensate, but Warfighter takes a huge step back from its predecessor. I have fond memories of watching an – albeit heavily scripted – AC130 gunship attack and other bombastic scenes two years ago in the first MoH reboot. Yet after completing the six hour campaign of Warfighter, I struggled to remember any eye-gouging set-pieces, just a few days later. If a shooter adopts the linear rollercoaster approach, it needs to be the equivalent of the Jurassic Park ride at Universal Studios, with vast environments packed with giant automatons and a dizzying array of special effects, but the ride on offer here feels more like a 30 second spin on a rickety coaster at your local Easter show. It’s got nothing on the non-stop set pieces of Call of Duty.

Then again, neither does Borderlands, which instead abates boredom by serving up fiendishly clever AI, making each firefight an interesting experiment in high-velocity manipulation. By comparison Warfighter’s AI-controlled troops appear to have been recruited from the cast of Hogan’s Heroes, providing a pathetic representation of the lethal skills that real special forces soldiers use. It’s not uncommon to watch friendly and enemy AI battle it out for minutes within spitting distance, neither side smart enough to actually aim their weapon. I also lost count of the number of times my teammates boxed me into a piece of cover, making it impossible to move until they’d stopped hugging me.

Even the storyline is a huge step back, despite it being one of the areas earmarked for improvement. I find it hard enough as it is to identify with game characters due to their robotic features, so when a game like Warfighter bounces between personalities like a schizophrenic off their meds, it soon became impossible to know just what the heck was going on. It had something to do with the (obviously) evil Muslims/Arabs of the world planning to blow up an American landmark and thus threaten world peace, but by the end I was simply heading for the next waypoint with no idea why.

Rounding out the disappointing single-player is a clusterfudge of an online mode. Saying nothing about the horrific lag problems (why can 64 player Battlefield 3 run great on this engine, yet Warfighter can’t handle 20?), Warfighter’s multiplayer is a mish-mash of great ideas, poor implementation and lack of experience. The buddy system is a great idea, where each player is automatically squadded up with another player, as forming a personal connection on such a small scale is easier than with a larger fireteam. However, one of the most confusing user interfaces I’ve ever seen hides the deep upgrade system, while extremely lacking map design sees most games devolve into a series of stalemates around the few chokepoints. Snipers seem incredibly overpowered, taking down targets with a single shot while lowly assault rifles can empty an entire clip without a kill, probably a result of the severe network issues.

There are a few extremely brief moments of promise in Warfighter – clearing a village from the side of a little bird with a sniper rifle and a high speed chase through Dubai are two areas that almost managed to be exciting. Unfortunately they’re surrounded by too many moments of bog-standard room clearing to matter, and the entire package is let down by one of the clunkiest online modes in recent memory. I’m not sure where EA went wrong with this game. Perhaps removing DICE from crafting the multiplayer mode left Danger Close stretched too thin to handle both sides of the coin. Whatever the reason, EA either needs to bulk up the studio with more talent or kill the series entirely. After the dismal reaction from the public to Warfighter, the latter may have happened already.
What we liked
  • Frostbite 2.0 does occasionally serve up sexy environments
  • Weapon sounds are guttural and raw
  • Buddy concept in multiplayer actually works well
What we didn't like
  • Lacks the bombastic set-pieces this kind of shooter needs
  • AI has the intelligence of a single celled amoeba
  • Online is a laggy, confusing mess, bogged down with average level design
We gave it:
Latest Comments
Posted 06:11pm 31/10/12
Posted 08:08pm 31/10/12
i was hoping this would be better than the last one....sadly it doesn't look good
Posted 08:50pm 31/10/12
Honestly I'm thoroughly enjoying the game, however I will agree that the singleplayer is absolute trash. The multiplayer however is authentic, offers a wide range of classes and weapon customisation, quite balanced and very fun. Playing with a friend on Teamspeak helps heaps, and the Fireteam system works a treat.

I feel like this new Medal of Honor series is going to offer players both mixtures of BF and CoD, with the tight map system of CoD and teamplay that BF plays on. With some more polish I reckon it will be even better, but so far I've definitely got my $40 worth and can see myself playing it even more.

I will say that the multiplayer UI is really good, in that everything is laid out well and I actually enjoy using the matchmaking system (it still uses the server system). You can opt to use the server browser if you fancy but its a bit lacking with inability to sort ping and names but overall works efficiently. The actual multiplayer feedback is great, the controls feel like Battlefield with a nice solidness to them, the content is there and the gunplay is great. You can't actually "spray and pray" as it will end up in you dying and them taking barely any bullets.

Maps are good, lots of paths to take and places to hide for cover. There is a lean system and also the melee is quite satisfying in that you have to sneak up for the kill, not simply run at them with a knife. Classes are fun, I quite like being able to be an Australian and raise an Australian flag when in CTF mode. There are "killstreaks" but they are defined by the class. Each one has unique offensive and defensive abilities that are quite balanced and go up from 4-12 kills I believe.

Overall I really like it, though it does have flaws like most games do on launch. However I can see those bugs being fixed up eventually and really they aren't that bad. Also I'd like to point out that scoping issue doesn't seem to be prevalent in my playtime, though I might not notice it.
Posted 10:30pm 31/10/12
I enjoyed the SP.

MP is just eh... sometimes I enjoy it but then I just start hating it.

The graphics in the SP are pathetic and it's distracting. Also the quality options for texture, mesh ect. DO NOTHING. You even have to turn off some of the other features to see everything. Like the outline of your fire team buddy.

The last MOH MP looked way better.

Major disappointment.
Posted 12:11am 01/11/12
The MP looked good in the video review i saw. I liked the idea of working in pairs, and with voice comm i reckon that could be f*****g awesome.
Posted 12:43pm 01/11/12
I have never managed to have the in game voip work with a fireteam member.

It can be good but most people don't really play together. The biggest annoyance is if the fire team buddy goes, often it means you're stuck with out one unless you leave and come back. I've been in matches where there's a bunch of people all playing alone. No auto balance for fire team members, no ability to change and join in game. Unless they're on your friends list or something.

It's these sort of annoying flaws which make the game a waste.
Posted 01:14pm 01/11/12
Wow, thats some pretty major flaws to the fireteam system. F*** that, ill wait for patches n a cheap key.
Posted 07:45pm 01/11/12
waiting for low price.Anyone can provide ways?
Posted 07:49pm 01/11/12
i like both the mp and the sp, nothing wrong with it really. generic shootery type stuff, pretty graphics, forgetable plot - i wouldnt pay more than 30 bucks for it but its not a bad way to spend some time in front of your pc. its getting a bad wrap for no real reason if you ask me, i know what these types of games are all about and to me it doesnt seem like warfighter did anyting worse than mw3.
Posted 01:53pm 13/11/12
I found it to be pretty good game... Definately got my moneys worth.... 4 wow maybe for game design I would give it an honest 8 for enjoyability... enjoying it as much as MW3...
Posted 06:04pm 13/11/12
enjoying it as much as MW3...

And that right there is a cause for concern...
Commenting has been locked for this item.