Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Review’

“Why Medal of Honor is Unrealistic?” or “Headshotting the Noob”

November 5, 2010 1 comment

I am not an American. But that doesn’t mean I can’t recognize the brave men and women who fight for their liberties and countrymen against an enemy so entrenched in the ancient ways of warfare, no civilization has ever been able to subdue them. The War on Terror is a messy, horrid affair. It is bloody, there are casualties and ultimate sacrifices are made on a daily basis.

When I picked up Medal of Honor, and perused through the marketing lingo with such bold catch phrases as “realistic military shooter” and “play today’s war firsthand”, I was intrigued. The original Medal of Honor landed you, in Saving Private Ryan style, on the beaches of Normandy. It was a terrifying affair, and one that permanently imprints you with the utmost sense of respect for the insanity, the violence and the sacrifices the Greatest Generation had to go through to topple the Third Reich. My expectations, understandably, were quite high for this latest installment.

Instead I got a bunch of bearded jocks who trash talked their foes, fought an unrelenting enemy without so much as breaking a sweat, walked around in plain sight without getting spotted, reigned death upon their adversaries while jamming to heavy metal, and proclaimed themselves the “not the hammer, but the razor edge that will decide the war”.

The troops that stormed the beach on D-Day seemed like a band of brothers, patriots till the end, fighting for what’s right. This new game made those respectable soldiers seem like a bunch of dicks who got some new cool toys to play with and they genuinely took pleasure in wiping out the enemy. My point is that the new installment, in its pursuit to be a cool,  “trendy” military shooter, instead came off as a lame attempt at capturing the war through Michael Bay’s lens with an equally abysmal cast of forgettable and fake characters.

The reboot sucked, and the final nail in the coffin, in all likelihood, will be in three days, when Call of Duty: Black Ops launches, and headshots MoH like the fucking noob it is.

“Compromised Quality Conundrum” or “Conniving Quotes Controversy”

November 4, 2010 1 comment

I have very fond memories of landing on the beaches of Normandy and being utterly stupefied at the D-Day realism portrayed by the original medal of Honor game. I finished the 2010 version recently. To put it mildly, it was less than stellar. To put it moderately, it sucked big bags of donkey balls. To be harsh, I would rather watch paint dry while gouging my eyeballs out with plastic sporks.  The AI was horrendous, the scripted events were a nuisance that interfered with in-game mechanics, too often the control was wrenched away from you, the story hung on by a thread in its half-hearted attempt at cohesion and immersion, and practically every mission seemed to be ripped directly from Call of Duty. There were a few moments of (at times scripted) brilliance, that helped me trudge on, but all in all the title was a disappointment, and left a very bad taste in my mouth.

Yesterday I came across this interview on Eurogamer, and it made me a tad angrier. Here are two direct quotes for your perusal:

Quote 1:

“What I can say is the game didn’t meet our quality expectations. In order to be successful in that space, we’re going to have to have a game that is really, really strong.”
EA Games’ Patrick Soderlund to Eurogamer

Quote 2:

“The game is better than today’s reviews are indicating.”
EA Games’ Patrick Soderlund to Eurogamer (yes, the same interview)

Here’s a question: if you yourself know your game did not meet quality expectations, why release it?

Here’s another question: if you did release it, and it was met with less than stellar reviews, why continue to claim, in the same breath no less, that the game was better than the reviews it received? You know you screwed up, you even admit to it. Just don’t go backtracking to save some face. If you were challenging a singular review, you could blame it on a difference of opinion or perhaps reviewer bias. But thee overall experience has been quite disappointing, myself included, and considering that it didn’t meet your own internal quality standards, why on earth would it receive favorable reviews upon release?

Bear in mind, however, that this doesn’t mean the game did poorly. On the contrary, Medal of Honor sold two million copies in just two weeks post-launch.

Categories: Review

“Why APB Turned Out To Be Such a Disappointment” or “Mike Schramm Read My Mind”

July 14, 2010 3 comments

“What APB‘s really missing in terms of gameplay is a real sense of progression. You’ll be doing exactly the same task five minutes into the game as you’ll be doing fifty hours in. While there are various sub-factions to earn reputation with that unlock bigger weapons, and a few stats (Notoriety for Criminals and Prestige for Enforcers) that go up and down based on your performance at any given moment, nothing really changes. No zones are conquered, no wars are won, no faction-wide rewards are granted. Even when you’re doing it right, it’s just mission after mission after mission, and while you are unlocking new weapons or bits of customization, all you get is a small text notice in the chat bar. Nothing about the gameplay ever changes.”

Mike Schramm, Review: APB (Day 2: Enforcers, get enforcin’), Joystiq.com

Categories: APB, Review

“Champions Online: Six Months Later” or “Super Powered Fiascos”

April 1, 2010 Leave a comment

I played Champions Online for a good three months last year. For those of you that actually read the blog know I was not particularly fond of mess the game had made, and the sheer lack of polish that Cryptic had the audacity to release unto the masses. I haven’t played the game in a good three months now, burnt out on lack of content, repetitious quests and in-game events that made me want to cry tears of blood.

Champions Online had a lot going for it, some of which I have even highlighted in the past, but does it have the chops to become a strong AAA title in a post-WoW arena? The fact that this question was posed by Patrick Mackey six months after the launch is enough of an indication that Cryptic made a lot of atrocious mistakes in the first six months. But perhaps there is still hope. Mackey over at Massively takes a look at the game and how it fares half a year after launch.

Worth a read
, especially if you are looking to indulge.

Categories: Champions Online, Review