EA Admits It Blew Medal of Honor: Warfighter

[Rad Party God]

The problem is, that people wanted a decent FPS, not a Dragon's Lair clone (and a bad one at that).

 

[gigastar]

You opinion on him doesnt come into this, take thy flamebait elsewhere.

Im asking because that is all his video was. He didnt make any real points other then he hates modern shooters and is willing to cherrypick a game to try and prove a point.

Now see, if you said that to begin with i wouldnt have come off as a dick.

And when TB gets like that he just does the demonstration and lets his viewers decide. He still hasnt done a proper first impressions of Warfighter yet.

Now, he stood his character in front open view of the sniper, and was shot multiple times with little observeable effect of the bloody screen. Worth noting that even amatuer snipers in an urban enviroment can manage a higher hit/miss ratio than the game snipers did.

When he goes outside without airstriking the biulding, he dies. Not of bullets, but of a death wall. Even in Eidos's old, forgotten, defunct squad-based MMS series on the PS2 when you had to 'laze' a target for airstrike that target was a tank sitting smug behind a road block of some kind, because once you took control of your sniper and picked off other snipers you didnt need to fear them endlessly respawning.

When the biulding is airstruck, instead of seeing a nice explosion worthy of Mr Torgue, with the biulding crumbling under the impact as the game engine (Frostbite 2, as seen in Battlefield 3) is theoretically capable of, your screen is obscured in solid grey for a few seconds while presumably the biulding models are switched around. Or maybe the entire map is reloaded around you.

Also on the video, just as the airstrike hits, the tree on the left suddenly teleports a short distance to the right. I cant think of a game in the last 10 years to come with that as a bug.

And in another video, which i truly cannot be bothered to find, he went into another detail for which he hated Warfighter. Those generic, thinly veiled Taliban soldiers are literally just that. Generic brown people whose sole purpose in the game is to be shot at either by you, or your toy robot. No characterisation is spared for them, even when you play as them during the campaign. If youve ever seen what a one-dimensional character is, the bad guys from Warfighter dont even qualify as that.

If theres anything more you need to know to see just how much of an utter shit Warfighter is, please consult a full review that is not by IGN.

 

[gigastar]

Spoiler

I can tell no one responding actually played Warfighter because it is actually the best online console FPS this entire console gen. Warfighter has the tightest and best FPS controls this gen. Here's a list of things Warfighter has that almost no other online FPSs have: leaning (a must for any FPS in my opinion, COD and BF don't have leaning, just embarrassing), dedicated servers (no host migrations!!!), and a slide and shoot mechanic that makes gun battles so much more dynamic (there's nothing like sliding around a corner to shotgun a camper). The guns in the game all feel great and there's actually recoil as well. The class system is very well done. The game is actually BALANCED unlike other FPSs (*cough*COD*cough*). The game is less laggy than most other games and there's only a few glitches after the patch (VOIP is still crappy).

With all that said, the single player was complete shit. But people buy games like this for the multiplayer, and the multiplayer is just awesome-sauce. Reviewers don't have a clue on how to review online multiplayer, they play for a few hours and that's it, not even enough time to learn the maps and mechanics fully. The game didn't deserve the scores it got, you definitely have to dock points for the single player, but 5s out 10 were unwarranted when the multiplayer is fantastic and that's what you buy a game like Warfighter for.

Hats off to Danger Close for actually making a good online FPS for a change. DICE is far worse at making multiplayer like MOH 2010 or they break anything decent they did like BF3. DICE needs to just make Mirror's Edge 2.

Now, if EA Los Angeles wanted to make a good online FPS, why did they tack on an all but neglected single player mode?

If the single player was totally absent, nothing of real value would be missing from the game (going from your comment) and reviewers cant shit on a game for a game mode it doesnt ship with. They might lament it, but they cant mark down a game for it.

The point of criticism is to point out things that are done poorly. For Warfighter, this was its entire single player.

 

[mysecondlife]

Oh thank goodness. I was worried that I just "didn't get it".

 

[dragongit]

I'll give them credit, one of the few times I've heard EA actually own up and admit a mistake. Granted it's not much, but baby steps.

It would be, if they hadn't said "the game was solid, but the focus on combat authenticity did not resonate with gamers."
which translates to " we made a good game, but everyone else is to blame for not enjoying it." which takes the baby step then jumps backwards off a cliff.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Spoiler

I can tell no one responding actually played Warfighter because it is actually the best online console FPS this entire console gen. Warfighter has the tightest and best FPS controls this gen. Here's a list of things Warfighter has that almost no other online FPSs have: leaning (a must for any FPS in my opinion, COD and BF don't have leaning, just embarrassing), dedicated servers (no host migrations!!!), and a slide and shoot mechanic that makes gun battles so much more dynamic (there's nothing like sliding around a corner to shotgun a camper). The guns in the game all feel great and there's actually recoil as well. The class system is very well done. The game is actually BALANCED unlike other FPSs (*cough*COD*cough*). The game is less laggy than most other games and there's only a few glitches after the patch (VOIP is still crappy).

With all that said, the single player was complete shit. But people buy games like this for the multiplayer, and the multiplayer is just awesome-sauce. Reviewers don't have a clue on how to review online multiplayer, they play for a few hours and that's it, not even enough time to learn the maps and mechanics fully. The game didn't deserve the scores it got, you definitely have to dock points for the single player, but 5s out 10 were unwarranted when the multiplayer is fantastic and that's what you buy a game like Warfighter for.

Hats off to Danger Close for actually making a good online FPS for a change. DICE is far worse at making multiplayer like MOH 2010 or they break anything decent they did like BF3. DICE needs to just make Mirror's Edge 2.

Now, if EA Los Angeles wanted to make a good online FPS, why did they tack on an all but neglected single player mode?

If the single player was totally absent, nothing of real value would be missing from the game (going from your comment) and reviewers cant shit on a game for a game mode it doesnt ship with. They might lament it, but they cant mark down a game for it.

The point of criticism is to point out things that are done poorly. For Warfighter, this was its entire single player.

You buy a FPS like COD, BF, MOH, etc. for the multiplayer. Yeah, the game needed to be docked points for a shit single player but people don't really buy the game for single player so the multiplayer should probably make up 3/4s of the review really. Reviewers need to actually review the multiplayer instead of just "trying" it when it's mainly a multiplayer game. There's no professional reviewers that actually do just a decent job at that let alone a good to great job at it. I don't ever see a online shooter review talking about balance issues and important stuff like that. The reason Warfighter and even a BF have a single player is because they are just supposed to have it and it's on a checklist of features that need to be in the game, nothing more. I'll play something like Bioshock, Borderlands, Deus Ex for my single player FPS fix.

 

[Strazdas]

This game flew completely under my radar, what was so bad about it?
I mean, it was put out by E.A so that could have been the problem right there, but I'd like specifics.

It had more options of ways to break down a door than actual gameplay. It was nicknamed Doorfighter (a play on warfighter) because half the game creation seems to have been concentrated on breaking down the doors.
Oh and apperently peopel said the gameplay sucked. you know, those people that played COD... so their credence.....

You buy a FPS like COD, BF, MOH, etc. for the multiplayer.

No, you buy a MMO for multiplayer. unlike what you think, people still do buy games fomr singleplayer only. as far as im concerned, multiplayer in COD, BF and MOH are exactly 0 worth in my opnion becuase im not going to play them. make me a decent singleplayer or you lost a sale there.

also the "bad leadership" part seems like a jab at their leadeship and quite an open one. i wonder if he will have to spend time in EA mosnter dungeon for a while for this.

 

[the clockmaker]

'combat authenticity'

the combat authenticity where you regenerate health?
the combat authenticity where the same few groups of soldiers are combating problems worldwide, where the Coalition special forces community apparently consists of about ten blokes?
the combat authenticity where one bloke takes over an entire ship without a scratch?
the combat authenticity where the battle space consists of one singular path that the entire team goes down at half meter spacings?
the combat authenticity where your pistol has unlimited ammo?
the combat authenticity where the only ieds that you encounter are marked clearly for you in bright yellow paint?
the combat authenticity where a fast deployment team apparently can pull UGVs out of their arses?
the combat authenticity where the insurgents attack you with a helicopter?
the combat authenticity where half of the karachi dockside is blown up during an undeclared operation and there are no repercussions?
the combat authenticity where all operations are direct action engagements?

There is no 'combat authenticity in this game, it is a bundle of bullshit dressed up in the newest uniform and using the newest kit, not fooling anyone. Honestly, some 12 air softer is more convincing than this game. And I know, I know that they had SEALs consulting, but they used that consultation to spray paint their game, instead of building something better.

I honestly don't give a fuck about whether or not a game is authentic, I enjoy battlefield, I enjoy borderlands, I enjoy COD and I enjoy crysis, but don't try and blame the failure of your game on the customer's inability to process your non-existent authenticity.

 

[Frostbite3789]

multiplayer in COD, BF and MOH are exactly 0 worth in my opnion.

So...every Battlefield game before BF3 didn't exist? Is that what you're saying? I just want to make sure. Because that's an extremely stupid thing to say.

 

[oliver.begg]

'combat authenticity'

the combat authenticity where you regenerate health?
the combat authenticity where the same few groups of soldiers are combating problems worldwide, where the Coalition special forces community apparently consists of about ten blokes?
the combat authenticity where one bloke takes over an entire ship without a scratch?
the combat authenticity where the battle space consists of one singular path that the entire team goes down at half meter spacings?
the combat authenticity where your pistol has unlimited ammo?
the combat authenticity where the only ieds that you encounter are marked clearly for you in bright yellow paint?
the combat authenticity where a fast deployment team apparently can pull UGVs out of their arses?
the combat authenticity where the insurgents attack you with a helicopter?
the combat authenticity where half of the karachi dockside is blown up during an undeclared operation and there are no repercussions?
the combat authenticity where all operations are direct action engagements?

There is no 'combat authenticity in this game, it is a bundle of bullshit dressed up in the newest uniform and using the newest kit, not fooling anyone. Honestly, some 12 air softer is more convincing than this game. And I know, I know that they had SEALs consulting, but they used that consultation to spray paint their game, instead of building something better.

I honestly don't give a fuck about whether or not a game is authentic, I enjoy battlefield, I enjoy borderlands, I enjoy COD and I enjoy crysis, but don't try and blame the failure of your game on the customer's inability to process your non-existent authenticity.

as far as MMS is concered this is realistic.

personally i play ARMA2, and if you really want realism you play VBS2

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Maybe this will cause EA to get its shit together and not do something like this for awhile. So hopefully they won't do the same to Battlefield.

 

[Skops]

I can tell no one responding actually played Warfighter because it is actually the best online console FPS this entire console gen. Warfighter has the tightest and best FPS controls this gen. Here's a list of things Warfighter has that almost no other online FPSs have: leaning (a must for any FPS in my opinion, COD and BF don't have leaning, just embarrassing), dedicated servers (no host migrations!!!), and a slide and shoot mechanic that makes gun battles so much more dynamic (there's nothing like sliding around a corner to shotgun a camper). The guns in the game all feel great and there's actually recoil as well. The class system is very well done. The game is actually BALANCED unlike other FPSs (*cough*COD*cough*). The game is less laggy than most other games and there's only a few glitches after the patch (VOIP is still crappy).

With all that said, the single player was complete shit. But people buy games like this for the multiplayer, and the multiplayer is just awesome-sauce. Reviewers don't have a clue on how to review online multiplayer, they play for a few hours and that's it, not even enough time to learn the maps and mechanics fully. The game didn't deserve the scores it got, you definitely have to dock points for the single player, but 5s out 10 were unwarranted when the multiplayer is fantastic and that's what you buy a game like Warfighter for.

Hats off to Danger Close for actually making a good online FPS for a change. DICE is far worse at making multiplayer like MOH 2010 or they break anything decent they did like BF3. DICE needs to just make Mirror's Edge 2.

While I don't agree with your last statement, Everything else is spot on. I do find it mind boggling that everyone looks at CoD, BF3, and say "Yes, the SP is short and underwhelming but really, just play the Multiplayer" and then when it comes to Warfighter, which I agree, arguably has the best FPS Multiplayer system and controls this gen, is completely passed over for the many flaws of the single player.

MoH Warfighter wasn't bad, it was the punching bag of a tired genre.

EDIT: Also, while the single player wasn't great. It was still miles better than that pointless dredge Battlefield 3 had. That Jet mission? Even Blackburn says "Well I don't see what that has to do with my story" in which I responded with out loud "GOOD! CAUSE NEITHER DO I! WTF WAS THE POINT OF THAT?!"

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

MoH Warfighter wasn't bad, it was the punching bag of a tired genre.

The thing is Warfighter revitalized the genre for me. I hadn't played an online FPS in 5 years before Warfighter, I played COD4 (the 1st and last COD I played) and got tired of that in a couple months. I have to have leaning in my FPSs (and TPSs) because I lean all the damn time, I lean more in the open during gunfights than I do to lean around corners. I also love the slide and shoot move, I do that all the freaking time (and my shooting accuracy doing it is ridiculous) to where my platoon hates playing against me when we get switched teams because I'm never a stationary target, always leaning and sliding, leaning out of a slide lol. This one time the enemy and I were moving towards each other, I slide past him, move the camera to where it's facing his back, and pull off the tomahawk behind the back kill animation during my slide (COD ain't got shit on that); he must've been so pissed. I like the fireteam buddy system and the classes are well done and balanced. The FPS genre is so stale in my opinion and Warfighter put life back into it. I initially wrote off Warfighter because of the reviews and me not liking online FPSs much, but I heard some people talking about how good the game was, I read it had leaning, then I watched a couple matches and saw the slide and shoot mechanic, and I just had to give it a try.

 

[Atomic German]

Can we all just take this as EA is finally starting to learn something?

 

[VanBasten]

Can we all just take this as EA is finally starting to learn something?

Since the article ends with "Well, we're just gonna exploit the Battlefield name instead", I really doubt they've learned anything.

 

[Treblaine]

Tell you what EA, go back to the first game of this generation that showed Modern Military Shooters could beat WWII shooter. COD4. Remember there was a time even when this generation started where even WW2 shooters were held in high regard and everyone doubted if COD4 was doing the right thing going to a modern setting.

I'm sure that the key to Call of Duty 4 was the right amount of levity. Not clowning around, but a certain sense of wit and humanity to the characters to ground the insane situations. Like "Surely you can't be serious... I am serious... And don't call me Shirley". It's just the kind of banter you'd expect with a crew of British Special forces. The COD4 credits ended with a 4th wall breaking rap by one of the voice actors and of course before that the final sad showdown was brought up again by the sudden challenge of an out of context mid-air assault on a hijacked plane.

That game nailed the tone in ways the sequels and imitators totally failed.

COD4 broke the risible overuse of sad lonely trumpet played for straight meldrama. But it was back in the old habits again with Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops.

 

[Gearhead mk2]

COD4 broke the risible overuse of sad lonely trumpet played for straight meldrama. But it was back in the old habits again with Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops.

I kinda liked MW2. It wasn't that smart and the multiplayer was pretty bad, but it was enjoyable and it had the sense to not go full spunkgargleweewee. And I gotta admit, that bit where you come out of the bunker and see the Washington monument all wrecked up? I'm british, but that really did kinda hit me. I'm a sucker for anything that has good music. BlOps was where it all fell apart for me. I played the Vorkuta mission, and I frigging loved it, but eveything after that was just so boring. The multiplayer was frigging awful. Zombies became hard as hell and relied on insanley complex easter eggs and secrets too much. After that, I never really bought another CoD beacause they just got stupider and stupider, yet they're bigger than ever. I am genuinley confused as to why it's so big.

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

"I can't tell if that second remark is an admission of culpability..."

Don't be ridiculous. It doesn't even come close to resembling one.

 

[Metalrocks]

thats almost scary that ?A said that. they usually ignore negative feedback and keep doing the same crap over and over again.
who knows, maybe far in the future, a ?A game might be good and we can like ?A as we did in the past.