DICE Says Taliban Controversy Affected Medal of Honor Reviews
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Hey DICE where's my Mirrors Edge 2 huh?. All I hear about is FPS after FPS from you and not a solid bit of news about a sequel to the most original game you've made.
Bullshit. The game was shit, plain and simple. It was an outrageously bad attempt to copy Call of Duty.
The maps that are literally just long corridors show just how far DICE has fallen. Before, they made truly innovative games like BF2. Now, they're just shitting out one unoriginal game after another, like BF-Heroes, BC2, and MOH-multiplayer.
The maps that are literally just long corridors show just how far DICE has fallen. Before, they made truly innovative games like BF2. Now, they're just shitting out one unoriginal game after another, like BF-Heroes, BC2, and MOH-multiplayer.
Yeah I'm sure the taliban removal was the biggest negative point your game had - never mind the 4 hour on hard campaign and the broken and poorly designed multiplayer...
I wish DICE would just admit they didn't try with the game - otherwise it would compete with their battlefield franchise.
I wish DICE would just admit they didn't try with the game - otherwise it would compete with their battlefield franchise.
Seems to me DICE or EA themselves just dont get that when a game flops, its flopped. Instead of talking about it just move on to their next international project and probably fail at that too.
Also having never heard of DICE before i wasnt surprised to find out they were subsidary to EA.
EDIT: Turns out Wikipedia can reveal glaring factoids, DICE was apparently bought out by EA (like so many others before it) in 2004, which is around when Battlefield 2 came out and the series became shit according to some earlier posts.
Also having never heard of DICE before i wasnt surprised to find out they were subsidary to EA.
EDIT: Turns out Wikipedia can reveal glaring factoids, DICE was apparently bought out by EA (like so many others before it) in 2004, which is around when Battlefield 2 came out and the series became shit according to some earlier posts.
I'm sorry but it is common knowledge that when you polish a turd, it remains a turd, and in this metaphor, the Taliban were the polish, Medal of Honour was the turd.
For people who don't get it
EDIT: Although to be honest i do love DICE, it was just sad to see MoH fail...
For people who don't get it
I'M SAYING THAT MOH WAS CRAP, WITH OR WITHOUT THE TALIBAN
EDIT: Although to be honest i do love DICE, it was just sad to see MoH fail...
As a PC gamer I find MoH to be a pretty poor excuse for a game. The multiplayer is poorly console ported and suffers from some pretty amazing bugs that should have been fixed before release. To top it off EA have said the game didn't really live up to expectations, but somehow I think they knew this before release and used the taliban fiasco to get more copies off the shelf.
The multiplayer component to the game was poorly made simple as that.
The multiplayer component to the game was poorly made simple as that.
Given that I have heard very few good things about the game at all, I don't think the contreversy had anything to do with it, as much as it just flat out being a mediocre game.
To be honest given the way they reacted to the Taliban thing I do not think it was a planned marketing stunt, but something that actually caught them by surprise. As some people have pointed out, one does not drump up that kind of contreversy and then back pedal. I got the impression that you had executives who weren't prepared for the issue unsure on how to deal with it, which is why things moved the way they did.
Such are my thoughts.
To be honest given the way they reacted to the Taliban thing I do not think it was a planned marketing stunt, but something that actually caught them by surprise. As some people have pointed out, one does not drump up that kind of contreversy and then back pedal. I got the impression that you had executives who weren't prepared for the issue unsure on how to deal with it, which is why things moved the way they did.
Such are my thoughts.
I think it would be better if DICE wasn't involved in a sequel to MoH. The multiplayer felt like it had split personality; it was trying to marry elemets from Battlefield and CoD, and because of this, it was fairly average.
Multiplayer in MoH needs a developer who can make it feel different to everything else already on the crowded FPS market, without having to feel that they are competing with themselves, and who don't have to run risk compromising their own franchise.
Multiplayer in MoH needs a developer who can make it feel different to everything else already on the crowded FPS market, without having to feel that they are competing with themselves, and who don't have to run risk compromising their own franchise.
Controversy affects game ratings, dozens shocked worldwide.
Granted, they got hammered, but the way it was handled made that one almost a no brainer, too. Not to nick from Extra Credits, but to make a choice with obvious controversy and then fall apart like toilet paper in a hurricane is almost literally the worst possible route to take, and the one with the most hurt feelings and grudges.
Granted, they got hammered, but the way it was handled made that one almost a no brainer, too. Not to nick from Extra Credits, but to make a choice with obvious controversy and then fall apart like toilet paper in a hurricane is almost literally the worst possible route to take, and the one with the most hurt feelings and grudges.
I thoroughly enjoyed the campaign, but unlike COD4, I'm not compelled to go back to it. The gravity of the situation and the chatter made it feel more authentic, and the ending still sticks with me. It's more of a, can I take this emotional ride again, than a 'this campaign makes me want to thrust my keyboard into the monitor' sentiment.
I just wish that the multiplayer brought more to the table. It was playable, but the progression was just so mechanical. I didn't enjoy the aspect of the game that should've been the most replayable, but c'est la vie.
I'd actually buy the sequel if the campaign was as good. If they don't botch the console versions first day. I'm not a big PC player, but it was smooth as silk, whilst the console version I played was not.
I just wish that the multiplayer brought more to the table. It was playable, but the progression was just so mechanical. I didn't enjoy the aspect of the game that should've been the most replayable, but c'est la vie.
I'd actually buy the sequel if the campaign was as good. If they don't botch the console versions first day. I'm not a big PC player, but it was smooth as silk, whilst the console version I played was not.
