Medal of Honor: Warfighter

[fracturedrich 21]

i dont no why they botherd i liked previous moh but with so many good games why even bother putting the time into this they should of took another year or to and made more of an effert for me they have just buried the series well done

[ItchyRash 24]

Such a shame as I actually really like the campaign on the last MoH. The campaign on that was a million times better than the BF3 campaign. Agree that this game has probably buried the series yet again. Ah well

[NicoThaDon 2]

I actually enjoyed this campaign a lot. It is a good mix and at a good pace. I think the review is especially harsh but it was always going to be with black ops 2 around the corner.

[RetroDad 23]

Hmmm... No mention of the 'decent' multiplayer until the summary box? Let's be honest, Warfighter was always going to be the runt of the current military fps games. In the interest of fairness though, the replay factor comes from online play. Would MW3 still have received a 9/10 if the focus during the review was purely on the short campaign? I was never interested in purchasing Warfighter, but I feel there needed to be a more balanced review for readers than presented here.

[Lancer Armstrong 13]

It's very rare in the world of gaming for a sequel to be worse than the previous installment. Hell, how is it even possible? All you have to do is stick to the basics, improve on what worked and get rid of what didn't. Even if you have nothing original to contribute, we at least expect the new game to be better on a technical level.

So what the hell happened? This was looking like a much more exciting shooter than Black Ops 2 (a.k.a. Call of Duty: Ghost Recon). How did they f**k this up?

I was never gonna buy this anyway (I prefer Halo and Gears, and the only military FPS I buy is Battlefield), but I was looking forward to this at least giving CoD a run for its money.

Still wouldn't be surprised if Activision is responsible for this "smear campaign", though.