Medal of Honor was shallow and boring. It tried so hard to emulate Call of Duty it ended up copying it. I hoped they would do something different as Call of Duty is as shallow and boring as it gets but apparently, companies don't like taking risks.
Keep in mind, it stands out from the pack the same way an injured baby zebra stands out enough for the lions like to pick it off for lunch.TheRightToArmBears said:MoH stands out from the pack?
Whuh?
Agree. Try opening a Operating system company...you can't because windows and apple already took it over.direkiller said:There is just too many modern FPS on the market based around Multiplayer
you oversatrated the market. Putting controversy in the game and over-hyping it dose not grantee sales. Doing something new that people find fun dose.
Possibly when they started needing to sell 3 million plus to break even, and only the first few days of sales mattered to the charts that would be appeasing shareholders and investors... I guess.Trogdor1138 said:Wait, so selling 1.5 million goddamn copies isn't impressive enough?
The games industry has an even more warped view of success than I thought. What happened to the days of a game selling one million copies total was a good feat?
It would be impressive if it wasnt a AAA title and selling anything more than 1 million units was pure profit. It would be like a summer blockbuster movie getting only 15 million in the opening weekend. Successful sales are relative to the hype/quality/production cost of the product.Trogdor1138 said:Wait, so selling 1.5 million goddamn copies isn't impressive enough?
The games industry has an even more warped view of success than I thought. What happened to the days of a game selling one million copies total was a good feat?
So you're saying that MoH development and marketing cost is over 180 millions dollar? That's more than most triple AAA movies.Wicky_42 said:Possibly when they started needing to sell 3 million plus to break even, and only the first few days of sales mattered to the charts that would be appeasing shareholders and investors... I guess.Trogdor1138 said:Wait, so selling 1.5 million goddamn copies isn't impressive enough?
The games industry has an even more warped view of success than I thought. What happened to the days of a game selling one million copies total was a good feat?
Because it made 90 millions in a few days? Good reason I think.Reagus said:My question is why oh WHY did MOH choose to go modern?
When he says that his game's protagonists "have the power to resonate with FPS gamers everywhere" solely because they are "so elite, so tough," I get the sense that he's describing the juvenile twelve-year-old militarists who are already hooked on MW2.Greg Tito said:"In this ultra competitive category, Medal of Honor stands out from the pack. By portraying the Tier 1 Operator as so elite, so tough, Medal of Honor offers a view into a world that has the power to resonate with FPS gamers everywhere."
i say do a speedthrough. basically when you get a brand new game free, play through it in a few days then boom! trade it in you play a brand new game and earn money! what i did with BRUUUUUUUUUTALLL LEGEND.Autofaux said:I got a copy of this for free. I wonder if I should sell it.
And you seriously can't figure out why *EA* would want to replicate the success of one of the highest-grossing video game series of all time?Bretty said:Actually I have given it a lot of thought...Suskie said:You're not giving it much thought, are you?Bretty said:Why people would want to mimick CoD:MW I have no idea.
I rented it and just finished the single-player campaign. It wasn't bad at all, but not nearly as pretty, smooth, polished or intense as the Call of Duty games are. It's worth a rental if you're into this sort of thing, but yeah, those 1.5 million copies will pale in comparison to what Black Ops is shaping up to push.
Well said. EA only did themselves a disservice by further urinating into the same ocean of recycled ideas and Call of Duty idolization as everyone else. Time has has shown with other titles that taking a distinct path has its rewards by establishing possibly new franchises or innovations for gameplay, and EA should have learned this from the likes of Deadspace and Mirror's Edge. The "can't beat 'em, join 'em" mentality is a myopic and shallow maneuver in the face of successful competition that only self-detonates when that same competition will almost always triumph through experience against a failed reproduction. They may as well have tried pawning off a post-apocalyptic shooter around New Vegas' release because it is a nigh-Sisyphean task to try and surmount an established game through mimicry.InterAirplay said:Snip
EA already made that game. It was called Battlefield Bad Company 2. And there was nothing wrong with it. They should have focused their efforts on cranking out some more expansion packs for it like the upcoming Vietnam expansion. Or at the very least included destruction 2.0 in Medal of Honor. Admit it. That game would be ten times more fun if you could blow buildings up at will. I'm actually kind of hoping the new COD game tanks too so we can finally be done with this whole modern military shooter fps nonsense.InterAirplay said:Christ guys, gaming communities everywhere are filled with people who like action FPS games but who don't like COD. Didn't anyone at EA say "hey, maybe we should make a game that COD haters will like, there's lots of them, it'll put less pressure on us and we can try going in our own new direction"?