A Review of CoD and MoH

[Chris Britton]

I know it's a few hours late but blame my dodgey Internet. But as i announced I was working on a collective review of Call of Duty 4 and Medal of Honour Airbourne. Now as RV did point out I should really not waste my time reviewing the latter. However I really felt that I could not review MoD without referring and comparing it to it's older Cousin. So without further ado, lets dive right in.

A brief history lesson for all those concerned, the MoH series has been going on since 1999. Officially longer then the actually WW2, it's popularity was partially thanks to the renewed interested in that part of history owing to the wonderful masterpiece of a film Saving Private Ryan. The game was a nice solid shooter which set a nice atmosphere, the sequel continued that nice mix except now you were behind enemy lines as part of a resistance movement, and it just made the setting much more rich, and I only need to mention Frontline to everyone to remind the people of what a fantastic, superb game it was, a perfect mix of front line and behind the lines game play with beautiful levels which although linear were able to deceive quite cleverly. The highlight was storming the beach and it was no suprised people did this enough times that they could have just done the whole operation themselves. However the series then contracted EA syndrome and has been getting much more sickly ever since, only surviving thanks to hefty wallets. Sadly like Super Mario galaxy is trying to recapture the SM64 lightning the same can be said for the Frontline lightning, and this one missed and hits that tree with two lesbians under it.

CoD has been around since the early decade. At the height on MoH's reign. Although the first couple of games were not quite as good as Frontline there was a certain charm to the game, the opening missions in Stalingrad were simply epic, it caught another side ot the thing and made some aspects of moH already seem tame, it had potential and as the first few missions on Finest Hour showed it was a budding Rose growing in the Activision Garden. CoD 3 not only topped that, it completely blew away all opposition like a class 5 Tornado, it was carnage, yet beautiful and deep and just stunning, like you have just ran into your definition of the perfect woman and no amount of willpower can stop you from holding her and saying every compliment under the sun.

So now we come to the latest offerings from both series, and while CoD 4 deserves all the praise it gets i also have to be honest and say that while MoH Airbourne is not bad, and is the best game of the series for years it still feels like the franchise is on life support, although out of the coma which remains with it. And thats me feeling generous for a change. Because from here on end the franchise gets into more twists then a thumb screw.

Now as you guys know I am not paticually fond of those old samey shooters in which you play the one decent recruit in the army totting a heavy machine gun and try to be realistic at the same damm time, just look at the things i slung at Crysis, but it's especially the same for war franchises where an endless stream of Nazis appear. WW2 however is still a hobby of mine and I will give a game credit if it manages to pull off the WW2 feat superbly. however CoD franchise has taken an interesting twist, they have decided to try setting a game in the present day around the time of the Gulf Wars. This at first came as a shock in the region of 20,000 volts up my balls. I was concerned as despite the lack of imagination evident in this days and age it was a case of if they could pull it off, even if it would be fighting Arabs or Ex-Communists and Nukes, this was right on the money but it's executed in such a compelling way. The series has been takening in a enw and imaginative way for it's type and i love series which try to mix things up.

Unlike most war games in which everyone is shortsighted and convinced my country is better this time you play from two perspectives, the British SAS which means stealth and the US marines which means all action carnage, it changes hands so often boredom is impossible, the controls are tight and funky enough and story and gameplay go hand in hand like a lovestruck couple in a field of sunflowers. Especially in the scene after a nuke is dropped.

Ok the game is not perfect, its always up to you to move forward unless you drop a grenade so your men are not stuck shooting in the same spot for days on end, and the British sergeant and his moustache reminds me of those German porn stars you hear about. However each character you get attached too which came like a kick in the nuts. or the ending which comes in the middle of a damm gunfight with no closure at all, like you have had a nice meal except the chef comes to fart in your face, but i am just picking at hairs. In short CoD 4 is by far the best of the series, a shining example of what a shooter needs to be to engross someone and the best shooting game I have played since MoH Frontline incidentally enough.

MoH Airbourne I have yet to touch on, however the game is shorter then Veryne Troyer however that it all stays in balance, unlike coD which loves it's realism this time MoH must be in an alternate universe where the Nazi's are gun totting cartoon villains on a sleepy Saturday morning and all your friends are giant colossal morons. To try and open the game up, which is trying trying to get your tis out of a sharks mouth you are parachuted in at the start of each level, a practice which becomes sleepily dull and you only have a couple of spots you can actually land in without becoming swiss cheese and bullet bum rape. However unlike CoD 4 where your allies actually know to fire properly MoH allies are less use then a pack of swiss cheese, mainly because cheese does not leap in front of you when your trying to mow down a squad of fascists, a recurring disease within the MoH games like a persistent zit what you can;t squeeze out despite destroying all the skin around it. At least then they don't say it's all your fault like a schizophrenic moron. they also seem to realise this and reply on yourself to actually do all the fighting. The germans also seemed to pick up on this and fire and you and ONLY you. it brought back sad memories of GTA 3 where even if you got attacked the moment you defended yourself the police would just arrest you as it seems you were a fool for just playing it safe.

The only realism in this is that it reminds you of how annoying and tough war can actually be, and not in the pleasant way. several times I got stuck like i was playing in tar for the 19 ****ing bastard time once again. it's like Farcry in that you don't possess the amazing cyber vision your enemies have to spot all 15 snipers at once while they gun you down before I can Boobies. Also unlike CoD who like to show us how each nation contributed in some way British troopers are somehow absent from this game. We are left with men who are all somehow handsome and can take 5 bullets in the groin and still carry on. I have plenty of respect for the US but it is nice to show how each country did it's little bit for the effort. Britain's airbourne made an impact and it would have paid to do what CoD have done and have a British Storyline. EA seem remarkably Biased against anything non German or American while CoD featrues not only those two but also Britain, Russia, Italy, Poland, France and Canadian Armies, EA seem to have forgotten it was a World War where everyone did their bit.. The Germans all sound like Hannibal but to their credit the game is accurate in that their guns are better, not stealing one in the first 5 seconds usually warrants a beating 10 seconds later. They also seem to make the Germans more evil then Darth vader sadly. I know my war and i am quite sure there was never an elite rank of Stormtroopers which had mini guns, gas masks and somehow took 4 bullets to the face and still did not ****ing die! I am also sure they did not have a gigantic armoured 15 story concrete tower probably more like a Fortress of Doom aside from the bunkers on the Normandy Beaches. I would not have been surprised if Hitler had showed up wearing a huge mech-suit and was atop a gigantic robot spider. in reflecting the game is briefer then my underwear, it's boring, repetitive but the shortness of the game should be a godsend. As much as i praise the series for also trying to mix things up it's not on the same level, in fact it's barely off the ground floor, I did not mind para jumping but after that it's just the same MoH game from before just now with better graphics.

So in hindsight to me the CoD franchise is the shining perfect recruit for any army, it's still in it's prime and if Activision can continue using their imagination and resources then I can't see this franchise slowing down any time soon, the fact they are now merged with Blizzard can only mean CoD 5 may contain the WW2 equivalent of a Zerg Rush but quite frankly I was blown away and unlike Crysis or indeed Halo 3 I was left drooling like a retreated sex obsessed Nerd wanting more. MoH on the other hand feels like the tired veteran now pushing 40 but since EA don't frankly care what i think or indeed what anyone thinks i can expect that thery will continue letting blood out of this franchise until such time that we have called evolved into lizards. I would not be surprised if the next MoH was set at sea where you constantly bored every German u-Boat form here to the moon.

Next weekend I won't be here but in 2 weeks time i attempt to string the game we all called Guitar Hero III.

[Jamie Minty]

MOH ain't that bad, yes your allies are plain stupid but they still make some good games: Rising Sun and Heroes2 ( first FPS online multiplayer for Wii)

But CoD is a lot better and 4 has been really popular due to its modern setting. I think MoH and Cod should stay/go in modern times (future)> I've really enjoyed stuff like Clancy's GRAW which was set in the future. It's interesting to see different visions for the future (as they're are thousands) and different advancements of weaponry and technology.

Stuff like Resistance is great to, a twist on the past. Monsters, new technology.

I think alternate reality's work well in games as (like they say in the recycling ads) the possibilities are endless!

[Chris Britton]

NC, let me be blunt, Rising Sun was terrible, and the ending was sudden, poorly executed and left no closure. Thats not my own annoyance with that game, but it was a disappointment. The only decent MoH games money can buy now are Frontline and Allied Assualt, despite being a few years old they can still stand tall as some of the best war shooters ever. I can only recommend them alongside every CoD game every made. Rising Sun was a sign of things to come, and i tried to deny it at the time but it was an ominous look into the future. Pearl Harbour was about the only good bit of that game. Everything else fell by the wayside, where as although D-Day defined Frontline, subsequent missions were of a consistant, enjoyable high standard too.

EA don't care though, they own such a huge stake in the gaming market they can pump out the same ten dozen games each year and make them crap because everyone buys them. It makes me look upon my Super Mario review in a better light.

And to be blunt, the MoH: Heros series is yet again another load of shit I have had to eat. I rented Heros for the PSP and all ti was was capturing the bloody flag or grabbing documents! Plot was non-existent and I felt forced to complete it, and even then that took 3 hours!!!

[Recurring Villain]

NegativeCyberman doesn't have any standards when it comes to games. He's like Yahtzee in reverse.

Not a bad review, although it seemed a bit more like a comparison. Also, I can't believe you liked CoD3. CoD3 was the worst CoD in the series (unless Treyarch tops it with CoD5, and I have complete faith that they will **** up CoD5). Unless that was a typo of CoD2, which truly was fantastic.

Props for writing a review about CoD4 without making every second sentence 'Did I mention it owns?'. Because that's what it would have been if I wrote it.

The thing about the CoD series is that, unlike most war series, they don't seek to glamorize war. That's what really draws me to it; the fact that they want to show you that, yes, it can be epic and awesome and adrenaline pumping, but it's also tragic.

It gives CoD a kind of 'intelligent' feel. Although IW wont win any awards for their writing, the way they tell the story and how they choose to tell it is what puts them a level above most other developers out there. Everything from that scene crawling out of the helicopter (you know which one), to the quotes you see when you die, they really strive to give you something more to think about than just, '**** yeah! Kill the rag-heads!'.

[Ronnie Rowlands]

can we have a good review of a game next? all this negatoryness makes me feel like shooting myself.

[Chris Britton]

Whats so fun about playing nice, especially in the state the games industry is in? Anyway I just gave CoD4 a rave review so you can hardly complain Ronn.

But I plan to review Command & Conquer 3: Kanes Wrath when that comes out, and given how much I loved C&C 3 i am positive about this one, in fact it''s about the only release I am looking forward to at the moment. So hopefully that will shut you up.

[Ross Hendrie]

Originally Posted by Chirs Britton

Britain did not have much of an Airbourne but it still made an impact.

Err, what about Sicily, Normandy(Pegasus Bridge etc...), Arnhem, Battle of the Bulge, Crossing of the Rhine? Not much of an Airborne? That's slightly damning, it certainly did.

I wont say that MoH Airborne is a brilliant game, because it isn't. I didn't have much of a problem with the gameplay, except the respawning in the air part, even though the progress you made, enemies you killed etc. is not undone, yet you're back in the air. Fair enough at the start of the mission, but once you've landed that should be it. The weapons mods and things I was slightly impressed with, as well as the skill drops etc. As for historical accuracy, Chris is right about the SS body-armoured, MG42 weilding walking tanks, that's just pissing on history.

As for CoD4, I was generally very impressed however there were a few things that I spotted easily and so should the developers. For a start, the labelling of some of the SAS soldiers was incorrect. The lowest rank in the SAS is "Trooper", not "Private". This shows a rather chronic lack of effort. Also, there were too many Americanisms in the British soldiers' speech. Referring to torches as "flashlights" was one obvious example. Also, believe it or not, I noticed a problem with the USMC speech. At several points they do that "hooa" thing that Americans do, however that is strictly a US Army thing as far as I know. Beyond these little tiny problems, it is a collosal game that is miles ahead of MoH which seems to be going backwards rather than forwards.

[Chris Britton]

Originally Posted by Ross Hendrie

Err, what about Sicily, Normandy(Pegasus Bridge etc...), Arnhem, Battle of the Bulge, Crossing of the Rhine? Not much of an Airborne? That's slightly damning, it certainly did.

A good point i did miss, In fact i have corrected it now and it allowed me to bring up the point that EA seem to enjoy drumming out anything which was not the US Army or the German Army, while CoD make the rather nice point of showing the war from as many different sides and perspectives as possible. No disrespect to the US or the Germans but it was a World War. I know EA have featured Britain but they seem to have forgotten they had an Airbourne to.

thats one reason i liked CoD 3 a lot, as you were playing in no less then 4 different nations, i was particularly impressed to see the Canadians and the Polish, perspectives I had always been curious about and made me look at the war a little bit more differently. I know MoH did Underground but I would so love to see a CoD game also set in the Maquis.

To put it bluntly, I still play Frontline and Allied Assault, even though they are both nearly 6 years old, but they defined the WW2 FPS genre and at nearly 6 years old they still stand tall, not only as a reminder of how the series should be but to also show how much EA have pissed all over the series. I still am happy to pick up any CoD game and play that however, as a point of perspective. I still play the original Command and Conquer games too, at least 13 years old.

[Ronnie Rowlands]

Originally Posted by Chris Britton

But I plan to review Command & Conquer 3: Kanes Wrath when that comes out, and given how much I loved C&C 3 i am positive about this one, in fact it''s about the only release I am looking forward to at the moment. So hopefully that will shut you up.

How unnecessarily rude.

[Chris Britton]

Well you were rude anyway, I was merely returning the favor, and you were rude because you complained i DID NOT do any good reviews, when you obviously ignored the praise I dolled out for CoD. In other words, you jumped into hot water without looking.

[Ronnie Rowlands]

Originally Posted by Britton

Well you were rude anyway, I was merely returning the favor, and you were rude because you complained i DID NOT do any good reviews, when you obviously ignored the praise I dolled out for CoD. In other words, you jumped into hot water without looking.

I wasn't rude. I mean focusing on a game that you found good, not using a good game for comparison.

[Recurring Villain]

Originally Posted by Ross Hendrie

As for CoD4, I was generally very impressed however there were a few things that I spotted easily and so should the developers. For a start, the labelling of some of the SAS soldiers was incorrect. The lowest rank in the SAS is "Trooper", not "Private". This shows a rather chronic lack of effort.

I always thought it was odd that it seemed like they couldn't find a British pilot to fly their helicopter or the AC-130.

Originally Posted by Ross Hendrie

Also, there were too many Americanisms in the British soldiers' speech. Referring to torches as "flashlights" was one obvious example.

I'm happy that they managed to avoid making the SAS stereotypical, so a few wrong terms is hardly something to complain about.

Originally Posted by Ross Hendrie

Also, believe it or not, I noticed a problem with the USMC speech. At several points they do that "hooa" thing that Americans do, however that is strictly a US Army thing as far as I know.

Hooa is used everywhere in the US Military, whereas oorah is specific to the USMC.

Originally Posted by Ross Hendrie

Beyond these little tiny problems, it is a collosal game that is miles ahead of MoH which seems to be going backwards rather than forwards.

Which is ironic, because MoH was supposed to be the game that 'saved' the series.

[Chris Britton]

Personally, the only thing improvedwith MoH was the ramped up graphics, because even they were going backward during the Ps2 games, European Assault looked and played much worse then Frontline. Graphics aside the games have hardly improved in the slightest. However this year or next year another MoH game will be quietly released and will be much worse. CoD 4 has topped MoH in every single aspect, in fact they were already putting the series to shame right back with the first game.

[Jamie Minty]

Originally Posted by Chris Britton

NC, let me be blunt, Rising Sun was terrible,

I didn't say it but what i meant was Rising Sun was good due to the co-op. I had great fun completing it with my mates even though it took 2 seconds.

And i also said Heroes 2 for Wii is good as EA have attempted to make the first FPS online shooter for Wii which is a brave move as it could have been shite. But as it happens it works very well and it is fun too!

And RV we all have our opinions I think certain games are good that you think are bad and vice versa. I mean if you ask me Crysis looks crap (sorry guys) but thats my opinion.

But I agree COD3 was shite. It was innovative for Wii controls but still was rubbish. Big Red One was good as it actually had a bit of a story to it, not just kill the Germans. It devolped characters and friendships and followed the Big Red One (are they real?) a bunch of characters that you can like, unlike the stupid Scottish guy in COD3. My fave in COD2 BRO was the guy who died by that wooden fence when a bomb hit him. I thought it was pretty sad when he died ;(

[Chris Britton]

Originally Posted by NegativeCyberman

I didn't say it but what i meant was Rising Sun was good due to the co-op. I had great fun completing it with my mates even though it took 2 seconds.

And i also said Heroes 2 for Wii is good as EA have attempted to make the first FPS online shooter for Wii which is a brave move as it could have been shite. But as it happens it works very well and it is fun too!

And RV we all have our opinions I think certain games are good that you think are bad and vice versa. I mean if you ask me Crysis looks crap (sorry guys) but thats my opinion.

But I agree COD3 was shite. It was innovative for Wii controls but still was rubbish. Big Red One was good as it actually had a bit of a story to it, not just kill the Germans. It devolped characters and friendships and followed the Big Red One (are they real?) a bunch of characters that you can like, unlike the stupid Scottish guy in COD3. My fave in COD2 BRO was the guy who died by that wooden fence when a bomb hit him. I thought it was pretty sad when he died ;(

For once, in gaming terms you are right. I actually had more fun on Rising Sun playing alongside my dad and blasting the Japs. The problem? They did not including every ****ing level! Which was a kick in the nuts with a metal shoe! That was about the most fun I had on it, and even then it was still fustraiting and saddening.

Crysis looks beautful graphics wise. It however is disappointing as underneath all the processor killing graphics it's just a disappointing run of the mill FPS with some War of the Worlds and Thief thrown in.

Heros 2 is nothing special, and it;s just EA wronging mroe money from the dried up sponge that is MoH

CoD: BRO was a cracking game. It had good looks, a good story, excellent characters, wonderful AI which did not run in front of you, beautful levels, instense action, it showed us how grim and gritty war was and it knew how to let you relax before suddenly blowing you away by plunging you itno the action. The last mission was by far the best! What pissed me off was how short it was! Even on easy mode! They simply stopped the game at it's best part and then left my feeling like I did on Halo 2, which was running into a concrete wall which then kicked you in the balls. It needed to be longer, much much longer. I would love to see a war game which lets you cross the Rhine.

The Big Red One is real, go look it up because they do exist. CoD actually sticks with keeping the game as accurate as possible.

[Jamie Minty]

Originally Posted by Chris Britton

For once, in gaming terms you are right. I actually had more fun on Rising Sun playing alongside my dad and blasting the Japs. The problem? They did not including every ****ing level! Which was a kick in the nuts with a metal shoe! That was about the most fun I had on it, and even then it was still fustraiting and saddening.

Crysis looks beautful graphics wise. It however is disappointing as underneath all the processor killing graphics it's just a disappointing run of the mill FPS with some War of the Worlds and Thief thrown in.

Heros 2 is nothing special, and it;s just EA wronging mroe money from the dried up sponge that is MoH

CoD: BRO was a cracking game. It had good looks, a good story, excellent characters, wonderful AI which did not run in front of you, beautful levels, instense action, it showed us how grim and gritty war was and it knew how to let you relax before suddenly blowing you away by plunging you itno the action. The last mission was by far the best! What pissed me off was how short it was! Even on easy mode! They simply stopped the game at it's best part and then left my feeling like I did on Halo 2, which was running into a concrete wall which then kicked you in the balls. It needed to be longer, much much longer. I would love to see a war game which lets you cross the Rhine.

The Big Red One is real, go look it up because they do exist. CoD actually sticks with keeping the game as accurate as possible.

I think we can agree 100%.

I never knew Rising Sun co-op wasn't the whole thing. My dad can't do FPS he just walks around aiming at the ground .

Heroes 2 is a nice step forward for the WII!!!

The Big Red One sound interesting.

The game took me a while as i played slowly through the levels. I might get it out again. Has there been a game where you play the D-Day landings???

I'd like to see Pearl Harbour in HD!

[Chris Britton]

Originally Posted by NegativeCyberman

The game took me a while as i played slowly through the levels. I might get it out again. Has there been a game where you play the D-Day landings???

I'd like to see Pearl Harbour in HD!

Games in which you play the D-Day landings:

Medal of Honor: Frontline (The D-Day landings there are the best in any game!)
Medal of Honor: Allied Assault
Call of Duty 2: Big Red One
Call of Duty 2 (PC)

Those are the 4 which deal; with the actual beach landings, but here are some which look at other aspects

Medal of Honor: Allied Assault - Spearhead ( deals with US 10st parachuting into Normady
Call of Duty (PC) Deals with 101st parachuting in and British 6th capturing pegasus bridge

There are only two scenes in Pearl Harbor which would look any good in HD The film was a terrible peice of bullshit, which was inaccurate, which abused artistic license and spat on the memory of those poor men who died that day.

The battle itself
Kata Beckinsale getting laid.

[Recurring Villain]

Originally Posted by Chris Britton

CoD 4 has topped MoH in every single aspect

CoD4 has topped most games in many aspects.

Originally Posted by NegativeCyberman

RV we all have our opinions I think certain games are good that you think are bad and vice versa. I mean if you ask me Crysis looks crap (sorry guys) but thats my opinion.

In reality, there is no such thing as opinions; there is only what is true and what is not. If two people disagree on something, either one of them is right, or both of them are wrong; they can never both be right.

In an age where science has revolutionized the way we live, it is only fitting that it should also revolutionize the way we think. Whoever has the best evidence wins.

Originally Posted by NegativeCyberman

My fave in COD2 BRO was the guy who died by that wooden fence when a bomb hit him. I thought it was pretty sad when he died ;(

Captain Price ftw.

[Ross Hendrie]

Originally Posted by Recurring Villain

I always thought it was odd that it seemed like they couldn't find a British pilot to fly their helicopter or the AC-130.

That's because there are no British military bases anywhere near the Bering Strait, or Chernobyl. As for the AC-130, Britain doesn't own any.

Originally Posted by Recurring Villain

I'm happy that they managed to avoid making the SAS stereotypical, so a few wrong terms is hardly something to complain about.

Im just saying, if they'd made any kind of half arsed effort to double check, they'd have been discovered.

Originally Posted by Recurring Villain

Hooa is used everywhere in the US Military, whereas oorah is specific to the USMC.

Ah.

Originally Posted by Recurring Villain

Which is ironic, because MoH was supposed to be the game that 'saved' the series.

I said it kept it going, MoH has yet to prove whether or not it is worthy of continuing.

[Chris Britton]

Ea tried to build up the hype but that failed badly, so they just had to quietly release it and hope for the best. But then again EA's average rating for games has dropped drastically in the last few years. especially when all they do is realize the same games each year just updated year wise and with the occasional graphics and gameplay tweak. They don't mix things up or use those brains.