Although we're still in the process of reviewing Danger Close's Medal of Honor Warfighter reviews for the EA published first-person shooter have started to appear online.
As always, we've corralled them up and put them in a list below. We'll be updating this round-up as and when more reviews are published, so check back regularly to stay up to date on the critical reception.
Polygon: 4.5 - Medal of Honor Warfighter's multiplayer failings underline its real problem - it feels thrown together, with little consideration for why its parts should fit. While the multiplayer's obtuse design decisions are preferable to the campaign's lack of artificial intelligence, decent mechanics, or interesting level design, it's still difficult to find much reason to recommend Medal of Honor Warfighter over the shooters it wants so desperately to resemble. In an attempt to build a bridge across Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty, Danger Close has once again fallen into the hole between them.
Eurogamer: 5/10 - There's been a backlash brewing for some time against the bombastic direction military shooters have taken, but it would be wrong to assume that Medal of Honor: Warfighter is simply the game unlucky enough to bear its brunt. The truth is far simpler and more depressing: it's just not that good.
CheatCodeCentral: 2.7/5 - Medal of Honor: Warfighter feels unpolished. It's a slew of great ideas mashed together in a way that doesn't give any of them time to truly shine, rushed out to make a deadline that didn't do it any favors. While there's enjoyment to be had here, it is fleeting and often devolves rapidly into frustration and boredom.
Destructoid: 5/10 - Charmless, cynical, and uninspired, Warfighter encapsulates everything wrong with the annual big budget shooter industry. It's really not an awful game, it's just insipid and shallow, a title that exists solely to exist, and squeeze whatever profit remains to be had from serving the same flavorless porridge to the same unadventurous customers. It will make its money, and keep the FPS factories in business for another year.
NowGamer: 6.5/10 - While it's disheartening to see the promise of Danger Close's previous effort fall foul of the explosive taint of Call Of Duty, Medal Of Honor: Warfighter is still a fairly solid shooter with an unfortunately short campaign length.
The Daily Mail: No Score - But what it lacks in realism, it makes up with its colossal production values and memorable multiplayer - a tried-and-tested recipe for success. It's not the deep, emotional journey many were expecting, but action blockbusters never are.
GameThirst: 6/10 - Medal Of Honor: Warfighter isn't what you'd expect from Danger Close, especially in a day and age when the FPS genre in particular has become extremely competitive, with developers like DICE, Infinity Ward, 343 Industries, Gurrella Games and Treyarch pushing the boundaries. And with big titles like Halo 4 and Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 available in less than one month, there's no need to buy Warfighter. Rent it instead.
Comments
34 comments so far...
svd_grasshopper on 25 Oct '12 said:
CVG: 9/10
Gambini on 25 Oct '12 said:
I wonder how these poor scores will affect the "main-stream" scores... perhaps CVGs/IGNs etc that would have given it an 8/10 (and they still might), but with the precedent being so low, they knock off a point or two?
....nah, more like it's just naff!
ingy on 25 Oct '12 said:
This could have been the reviews for the previous two or three Call of duty's if we're honest,....kind of long overdue for the backlash to finally reach the reviewers.
It'll be interesting, though probably not surprising, that the Black Ops game will suffer the same old problems but will still score at least 9/10 across the board,...i just think it's time for something new.
infamous76 on 25 Oct '12 said:
well said my man, couldn't agree more
toaplan on 25 Oct '12 said:
The short campaign length is disappointing and means that I'll be picking this up from the bargain bin. I could have looked past the glitches, slavish CoD-copying, linearity etc. but a 6-hour SP campaign is a deal-breaker in this case. Even if it's fairly solid, has got big guns and looks nice on the PC. I'll save the money for Crysis 3...
richomack360 on 25 Oct '12 said:
But don't buy it full price.
IAmTheWalrus on 25 Oct '12 said:
A lot of people and reviewers were surprised that the game felt "rushed and incomplete" .... really? SURPRISED!? this EA that we're talking bout, of course they would force Danger Close to rush the game out so as to get a head start over Halo 4, Assassin's Creed III, Call of Duty: BLOPS 2 etc
Without sounding like a cynical ba$tard, I hope this fails big time, teach EA a lesson about quality assurance, something they seem to be forgetting lately, Dragon Age II, Mass Effect 3 and now Medal of Honour.
karkify on 25 Oct '12 said:
Hahaha saw this coming. It's a shame the MoH series has come to this.
Taus on 25 Oct '12 said:
Wow, the 'flavourless porridge' reviewer did not hold back, even felt the need to use a metaphor to express how crap the game is
Guess the review copies not being sent out until launch day wasn't to do with a 'critical patch' that fixes the game
Toasted_PSP on 25 Oct '12 said:
I thought lack of quality control was a problem with the gaming industry as a whole, I wasnt aware it was exclusive to EA
Bethesda will be pleased to hear that 
svd_grasshopper on 25 Oct '12 said:
in this instance, they were extremely pushed for time. a lot of work was still going on after it had went off for pressing.
it's clear they should have missed their deadline, but the series isn't worth it and they HAD to release it before call of duty.
bugs are one thing though, a s**te game is another.
Sleepaphobic on 25 Oct '12 said:
Sorry but I can't take any of these reviews seriously. How can you review such a mp heavy game in 2 days? With respect to sp the scores seem right, it does feel rushed and uninspired. AI is retarded too, during breaches you have to do ALL the work. Liked the previous MoH much more.
gmcb007 on 25 Oct '12 said:
10/10 Not even worth renting.
Hang on, is that a Daily Mail review? Aren't they anti-gaming? Probably only liked this game because you can kill people who are not white.
TheLastDodo on 25 Oct '12 said:
Bit harsh.
CoD is far more polished than this game sounds to be.
This is taken from a review after the patch:
You're unlucky if you get one of these bugs in CoD from my experience.
Danger Close messed up the 'Start Menu', the frickin' Start Menu
KK-Headcharge78 on 25 Oct '12 said:
What a crock of s**t, in your opinion maybe but I'm pretty sure you will find a fair few million gamers who have loved those CODs, equating this score with them is pathetic. It is time for something new for you maybe, but many are happy with a good military FPS.
Which brings us on to this, which apparently is not good. Not good reviews and I don't for a moment think they are not accurate (although have they really got a good grasp of the MP?- the main reason a lot will buy it) It does all reek a bit of emulating COD, or trying to, the beauty of the last MOH was that it was more of it's own thing which appears not the case here. Disappointing
EvilWaterman on 25 Oct '12 said:
Ive been reading the MoH Battlelog forums and lots of people are loving the MP. I'm not interested in the SP, they are all the same as each other, all trying to out do each other on massive set pieces! When will they learn that we want a SP game with purpose and meaning???
Ali_ on 25 Oct '12 said:
I'll still pick this up as I was a big fan of the last game in the series, far preferring it's more personal campaign story to the Tom Clancy/Jerry Bruckheimer style nonsense of Modern Warfare. I also enjoyed the last game's MP despite the criticism it received for not being CoD (which is perverse as surely COD already exists and people can buy that if they want to play that style).
Shame it does sound as if it's been rushed though. Danger Close did a great job on the previous game's SP but they had DICE to handle the MP. Maybe doing both, and starting fresh on a new engine, was just too much to handle in 18 months?
Toasted_PSP on 25 Oct '12 said:
I have played so many games critics thought were good but I disliked and equally as many games critics thought sucked and I enjoyed that I don't take any notice of reviews any more. A YouTube video with some gameplay is about all I need to make a relatively good judgement about whether a game is for me or not.
The last MoH games got average to good reviews but nothing great and had a short campaign but I found it a pretty enjoyable bargain bin game while it lasted. As a solo campaign it was certainly better than Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3 and some of the CoD games as well.
EvilWaterman on 25 Oct '12 said:
+1
IAmTheWalrus on 25 Oct '12 said:
It's not whether the game is inherently good or not, it's FULL of bugs, and not just every now and again like Skyrim, I have 100 hours logged in that and came across nothing untoward, (although I heard the PS3 version was a mess so maybe my point is probably moot, lol) you'd be mad to waste your money on such a shambles of a game, but avast, it is your money.
discodave11 on 25 Oct '12 said:
Seriously, reviewers complianing that weve seen it all before!!!
Christ the COD series has been doin this for years!!!!!
Imaduck on 25 Oct '12 said:
Explains the sleazy embargo. They knew it was guff so they decided people should buy it and find out rather than be told.
Always thought it had a s**tty name. "Warfighter" ..... come on man, it's like "Fifa 14: Ballkicker".
flyfletch on 25 Oct '12 said:
This is the reason i never pre-ordered this pile of steaming turd, the last MOH was enough to put me off the series for life.
dwhlufc on 25 Oct '12 said:
flyfletch on 25 Oct '12 said:
lol very good
Toasted_PSP on 25 Oct '12 said:
I have yet to play a game that has been as bad as it was made out to be. I have played Fallout 3, Skyrim and even Half Life Orange Box on my PS3 and although each included some problems they were nowhere nears as bad as was made out on forums and comment sections like these.
By the time I get around to playing this game it will probably have been patched, possible even a few times so I doubt the under £10 I spend will be wasted.
KK-Headcharge78 on 25 Oct '12 said:
To be fair there is a host of American players on YouTube saying the exact opposite of these reviews with reference to the MP, it actually looks pretty damn good online.
TheLastDodo on 25 Oct '12 said:
It looks awful to me, so boring.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbX1duovBR8&app=desktop
This guys running all over the place and he can't find anyone because they're all camping, I thought CoD was bad for camping but this takes the biscuit.
And he's got another three vids like this too.
Great vid title BTW.
drunkadin on 26 Oct '12 said:
made my day.
EvilWaterman on 26 Oct '12 said:
You've obviously been reading Gamesradars feature........
richomack360 on 26 Oct '12 said:
I am liking the sound of this sleazy embargo.
c97dem on 26 Oct '12 said:
I honestly couldnt remember how short the MoH campaign was for the 2010 reboot.
So while I was ill yesterday *koff koff*, I installed it on the 360, booted it up and started playing at 2pm on normal difficulty and completed it by 6pm!!!!!
Didnt remember it being that short, but bloody hell thats awful for what was a £40-50 rrp game in 2010 and Warfighter is shorter than that if the reviews are to be believed.
So much for EA being all nicey nicey and helping developers and not rushing them etc like they used to do...and Activision taking over the mantle of all evil overseer for games.....EA are just as bad as ever
Ah well, least Forza, BLOPS2, NFS Most Wanted (another EA game so a little worried but Criterion are awesome), Assassins Creed, Hitman, Halo 4, Farcry 3 etc are all out in the next 4 weeks so MoH will just get beasted in sales!
Expect *another* reboot of MoH in 2 or 3 years time
The Bossman on 26 Oct '12 said:
Watching ELPRESADOR play the game is a painful experience, no-one moves in multiplayer. He shot a guy hiding behind a wall, then got killed by his buddy sitting in the corner behind him, crouched down with his assault rifle. I was interested when it was announced, but I wouldn't play it now if I was paid to.
Imaduck on 27 Oct '12 said:
I don't go to Gamesradar waterman, barely time to keep up with CVG during the week. Why what are they saying?!