|
|
 |
|
|
|
Medal of Honor Airborne Review (continued)
More User Submitted Medal of Honor Airborne Reviews
Date: 2008-07-15
LAME
Don't buy this game. You can't save except at checkpoints, so when you are killed, you have to play through almost the whole thing again just to get back to where you were. Even a head shot with an M1 Garand does not drop the enemy, COME ON!!!! The enemy soldiers have superhuman reflexes and can duck as soon as you pull the trigger. This game is boring and you feel like you are fighting with a pea shooter for all damage you can do to your enemy. First person shooters need to find another war to fight, (Korea would be cool) We have won World War Two too many times now.
Date: 2008-07-05
top fun & joy
Excelent piece of work of entertainment, highly recomended, not as large as i expect but great work anyway.
Date: 2008-06-22
Medal of Honor stepped up... but just a little...
Okay, so the saga of 'Medal of Honor' hasn't been that great, but I have to admit that 'Airborne' has hit hard compared to great first person shooters today.
One appealing aspect of the game is graphics, 'MOH' has pushed its gaming graphics to the highest standard in gaming, although the menu was a little cheap but the gaming overall surprised me.
The story-line is the same as usual; you are a soldier during the World War, and you are writing about your experience in the line of duty. The story-line does make sense, so I have no complaints on that.
Now onto the finer details:
If you have read a history book lately, you'll realize that the context created within the game is totally out of proportion, but then again, who doesn't like to create a nice "challenging" game?
What's worse is that 'MOH' expected the gamer to fight off of these different soldiers under leveled hierarchies as you move onto the next mission. Not only we are following a story line, but it seems to me that the story line is following these extremely unnecessary targets which is so out of proportion that this redundancy tends to get out of hand.
Another disappointment is that the game didn't have an introductory video to the game, it simply led the game straight to the menu, and even the menu became all tacky, but 'MOH' has always done that.
What truly made me infuriated is the checkpoints, and no "quicksave". Most games today are using quicksaves so that way it's more gamer friendly, unfortunately, 'Airborne' disallowed that with limited checkpoints available. I'm sorry EA but I hope you know that once a person dies in the game, and happening to know that he or she have to start all the way from the beginning kind of makes me want to throw the game in the trash. To be honest, it's not worth playing from the beginning again.
On to the positive pieces, I like the awards you get, like the weapon awards where you'll receive a faster reload, or less recoil, etc. which gives the game its uniqueness and the ability for the gamer to keep playing the missions until he/she completely finishes the game with the awards. But like I said, with no "quicksave" I wouldn't even want to go back and do it all over again.
Aside from all of this, I would say that the game is pretty much a nicer version of 'Wolfenstein' with the different crazy looking soldiers.
And of course, under the line of 'Call Of Duty', it still beats 'Airborne'. Even the first 'Call of Duty' game is more appealing than this and its graphics aren't that amazing.
So it's just to show you, that graphics aren't the only things that makes a game great.
For example, take a look at 'Splinter Cell's' 'Double Agent' game and compare to all the other 'Splinter Cell' games. You'll see what I mean.
Date: 2008-06-04
a great gaming experience
MoH A starts a bit slow, the interface is amateurish and EA's website wants you to pay for the soundtrack (in yer dreams), but you know the core game is fantastic. Programmers managed to create a punishing yet fair health system and the difficulty level is just right bringing you back to parachuting in different areas of the map as you try to accomplish your duty. Sure you need to download patches to fix the game but it's worth it- the final mission is a sheer delight (I have that tower in my nightmares) and the closure is satisfying. I had more fun with MoH A than COD4. Note: I don't care about multiplayer action so not sure how that rates here.
Date: 2008-05-26
Not Call Of Duty, for sure
Having been a game designer for a few years, and a gamer since I was 25. At 61, I have come to expect a certain amount of quality, and playability from the games I buy. MOH Airborne falls short of my expectations. Their "sighting system" for the weapons available to the player, leave one frustrated and displeased. Having spent time in combat in Vietnam, I KNOW how to aim and fire a weapon. In MOH Airbourne Assault, it's as if the player is spastic, you find yourself having difficulty aiming your weapon, and become frustrated. Even when you have the enemy squarely in your sights, the chances of your hitting him are beyond statistical probability.
I've NEVER had so much trouble hitting a real enemy as I had hitting NPC enemies in this game. They need to review their statistics for the hit/miss algorithm. Meanwhile, the Italian "Blackshirts" all shoot like Annie Oakley, or Daniel Boone. Fun factor? Two out of ten. Overall, two out of five for the nice graphics, but it STILL isn't Call Of Duty (any of them) or Half-Life2. Too bad too, I was hoping for more for my money.
|
|
|
|
