A franchise history that is as long running as the “Medal of Honor” series is filled with stories of success, failure and steep competition. Electronic Arts published the first “Medal of Honor” game in 1999 and the success of the title led to many more World War II themed games.
After several more “Medal of Honor” titles had been created, two lead developers of the game moved on to start their own studio called Infinity Ward, which started to make World War II shooters for the company Activision. This spawned the long competition between Electronic Art’s “Medal of Honor” and publisher Activision’s “Call of Duty.”
With many new games from both publishers, the market quickly became saturated with World War II games. Infinity Ward then announced that they would be creating a “Call of Duty” game subtitled “Modern Warfare” set in the modern military world. This excited consumers who longed for something different.
Infinity Ward’s 2007 “Modern Warfare” was a huge success that blew its competition out of the race. Most were tired of World War II games and the “Medal of Honor” series had become stale, mediocre, and downright bad. Electronic Arts quietly tucked “Medal of Honor” away for a few years, watching Activision profit with “Modern Warfare” and its sequel.
Three years later, Electronic Arts is bringing its series back in a current military setting. Comparisons between “Medal of Honor” and games from the “Call of Duty” series are inevitable, but Electronic Arts has taken some very good steps in an attempt to help the 2010 “Medal of Honor” reboot stand out.
Game developers consulted with actual Tier One Special Forces Army soldiers to create a more realistic shooter with authentic combat tactics used by U.S. soldiers.
A bold but impressive move made by the game’s developers is the choice to have the game set in Afghanistan. Most modern military shooters skirt around current military operations and locales, but the sensitive nature of using an ongoing warzone helps add to the realism and atmosphere.
Naturally, using the Taliban as the enemy in “Medal of Honor” was a controversial move that caused the game to be banned in U.S. military stores and provoked an outcry from several groups including military families and opponents of violent video games. While the name “Taliban” has been removed to respect the wishes of the U.S. military and families affected by the current ongoing conflict, the game itself remains unchanged.
As the first “Medal of Honor” game set in the modern era, it unfortunately treads on the same ground that “Modern Warfare” awed gamers with back in 2007. Much of the novelty of using modern weaponry, from high-powered sniper rifles to massive explosive set pieces, has been done before by the “Modern Warfare” games, and although “Medal of Honor” does all these things correctly, it can’t shake the feeling that it’s already been done before if not better.
What “Medal of Honor” lacks in novelty it mostly makes up in authentic set pieces and the aforementioned authenticity.
Despite the disadvantage that “Medal of Honor” has when facing the original “Modern Warfare,” a game so incredible that even “Modern Warfare 2” struggled to surpass it, Electronic Arts’ strategy to aim for a more realistic shooter without sacrificing pacing really pays off. While the story is nothing spectacular, which is somewhat disappointing for a game with a single player campaign, the aiming and movement controls are tight and the guns pack a great punch. Other than some questionably constructed set pieces and some slowing of the frame rate, the single player holds up quite well with good controls and a great musical score, especially if you like Linkin Park.
The multiplayer is a whole other story with “Medal of Honor.” A different development team was brought up to create it, so gamers should expect a different feel in both controls and map design. The multiplayer aspect of the game was created by DICE, known for its “Battlefield” series, which have been popular multiplayer games set both in World War II and modern times. It’s a jarring switch between the single player campaign and online multiplayer, and it may not sit well with some gamers who prefer one system to the other.
It’s tempting to say that the multiplayer is simply a carbon copy of DICE’s “Bad Company 2,” but that’s not entirely the case. The game play online has been sped up a bit towards the arcade shooter speed of “Modern Warfare 2” and is focused on infantry game play despite offering vehicles. The multiplayer is all about proper positioning on the field with your team to avoid having the enemy getting a drop on you. A lack of situational awareness and a few bullets spell a quick death, and this can be aggravating for gamers.
While the 2010 offering of “Medal of Honor” is a mostly successful reboot with its unmatched tactical realism, great atmospheric game play, and amazing visuals in the Afghanistan landscape, it may simply have come a bit too late and at a bad time. Microsoft’s megahit “Halo Reach” has only been out for a month, and Activision’s “Call of Duty: Black Ops” hits stores in another month. Target audiences for first person shooter games will be divided between two familiar and highly lauded game series, and may be less than willing to give “Medal of Honor” a chance.
It may be the reboot the series needs, but probably not at this time. Whether or not gamers choose “Medal of Honor” over the other first person shooter, it’s worth a play even if just to experience a well constructed game that Electronic Arts put a lot of effort into, and to get a glance of where they will be taking the “Medal of Honor” series.
