Standard Shooter

Medal of Honor is back. 11 years after the publication of the first part the honored war shooter series has finally arrived in the modern age. But instead it Call of Duty imitate and invent a fictional scenario, EA goes out all the stops and takes the current conflict between the Taliban and the US Army as a model. A touchy subject, the standards could however set in the genre, with proper approach.

Always the same

The single-player campaigns today's war games have become familiar to every gamer. Enthralling staging, audio visual overstimulation and a certain degree of violence, the most distinctive features of Call of Duty and Co. However, what most lacking is a story that deals with the serious issue of the war in an appropriate manner. While it was already expected, but unfortunately must also be mentioned in this context Medal of Honor. The developers have gone the easy route and have put all effort into staging. Although there are some cutscenes that do seem to want to tell anything, but really a lot of this does not come around. Mostly one sees merely a stereotypical, tough commander who is oversized screens with the President in connection and is planning the next steps of the troops with him. But the supposedly heated verbal exchanges act here rather ridiculous, not least because of the terrible German synchronization.

However, Medal of Honor is not only storylos but a prime example callow war shooter that make me really angry now. Only make me angrier the developers who tell in their interviews with pride that they have any former military types brought to the side to make their game as realistic as possible. What you get then to see in the final game namely, is rarely realistic, and certainly not a responsible approach to the issue of the war in Afghanistan. When I almost invincible as a shooter an AH-64 Apache dissect an entire village and countless Taliban flying through the air leave, while in the background a groovy Linkin Park song is playing, I seriously wonder what the makers could have been thinking. Each of a bit familiar with the current war events, simply must inevitably have moral objections to such scenes. If I already aussuche me a real-world war as a setting, it is urgently needed, that I am dealing with the matter and possibly political backgrounds illuminated to allow a differentiated view on the subject. But developers of Medal of Honor go exactly the other way, which is the way the callous super soldiers who Around every second enemy, without even batting even blink.

Maybe I get upset and simply on the wrong people on. Ultimately, it is the buyers who can shoot up the sales figures of such games and overwhelm both the publisher and the developer formally with money. Just a lack of reasonable criticism that not only nod in agreement and reserved 80% budge. I would also want to make my money, and works currently with strikingly staged war games unfortunately best. However, even the largest publishers should eventually realize that they are just about to throw the art form video game far in its development back. This problem does not exist in the film industry. Here you will find a variety of war films that illuminate the political background of the war or the fate of traumatized soldiers show. Video games is in this development probably the fact in the way that they are financially very costly and a underground scene would hardly have inventory. So long as neither the players nor the publishers change their point of view, there will never be an innovative wargame, leaving the beaten track.

Monotonous everyday war

If one disregards the general war game discussion, plugged in Medal of Honor, of course, a more or less normal game, which unfortunately has some quirks in this case. The mission design is boring beyond measure and too abwechslungsarm. It runs continuously from use target to use objective, riveted on the road en masse to opponents, starts the next level and makes the whole thing again. The only diversion offer air missions, like the already mentioned Apache flight, some small creep and sniper passages and a little quad Gerase. Actually, this variety you can also put on the hat, because it is even more boring than the rest. However, the peak of boredom are several marking sequences in which you mark from a safe distance targets, to destroy them with an air raid , Incredibly exciting.

The graphic does not leave one hundred percent positive impression. Although it is by no means bad, but remains particularly due to poor textures well below their potential. Much worse, however, are the many mistakes, like flying knives and RPGs which really should be located on human bodies themselves. Sound Technically, however, makes the game nothing wrong, even if the background music in some places is quite questionable (see Linkin Park in Apache Mission). The staging is also satisfactory, but goes against the direct counterparty Call of Duty under fairly. All in all, the campaign of Medal of Honor is thus quite a pickle. As an even outrageously short game time of 4 hours is almost back matter.

Bye, Innovation!

The only reason I can not give the worst rating ever Medal of Honor, is the multiplayer. This provides good online shoot-usual, but still has to contend with a big drawback: There are no differences with other established online shooters. The guys from DICE (yes, the Battlefield types) have apparently removes any innovation out of her mind and has presented the great potential for all the tricks. There are only four game modes, three classes and the usual assault rifles, shotguns and sniper rifles. If one makes a class points, one more and more weapons and extras unlocks for selbige, with which one can even better score. The game modes are a common team deathmatch, a capture mode and even create and defuse classic bomb. At least a bit new is only combat mission, almost a type Vorrück mode, in which the attacker must take five goals in succession to win. Although I have already my fun with the multiplayer, but if you have already Call of Duty and Battlefield on the shelf, you can save the money for Medal of Honor confidently.

Conclusion

What we get offered here of EA, is probably the biggest disappointment of the year. The single player is a bad joke, and the multiplayer looks like a mash of all the standard ingredients that must have an online shooter nowadays. Even if a negligent treated the subject does not matter, you will be put off by the deficits in terms of staging, mission design and graphic enough. And he who seeks only a good online shooter, should spend his money rather for other titles. Medal of Honor has nothing that does not offer other games in better.