• Publisher: EA Games
  • Release Date: Nov 4, 2004
User Score
7.1 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 37 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 25 out of 37
  2. Negative: 9 out of 37

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

  1. FrankB.
    May 29, 2005
    10
    super good love the gameplay everyone must buy it
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  2. TomJ.
    May 2, 2005
    4
    The load times are totally obscene. When I can finish a beer, get another AND use the restroom between getting killed in SINGLE PLAYER mode I think a redesign of how the levels get loaded needs to happen. I've got a gig of ram and a 2 gig machine. This is rediculous. The game is well designed and totally fun, but when I only have a few hours after the child goes to bed and before I do, mindless yahoo.com games that load instantly are becoming more appealing. I've been a MOH fan since the first installment. Hopefully the NEXT $40 that EAGAMES takes from me will be more worth it. Try again, guys. Expand
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  3. jhonathanhellbourne
    Jun 20, 2009
    9
    This game is my first FPS game and I enjoyed it every way exept that even on the easy setting it was too hard like on makin atoll where I have to save a pilot or some body and the first screen your a** get shot, and tawara(?) island you have to go point A to point B again your face gets shot this time but other than that it's a great game the graphics were great back then the physics engine kept glitching but that was because I skipped to install something. anyways this game is a worth have and is very fun Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  4. LucyM.
    Nov 5, 2004
    10
    Fabulous. This game is totally engaging and I would recommend it to any FPS fans!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  5. ChrisK.
    Dec 16, 2004
    9
    With a highspeed video card (ATI Radion9800) this games graphics and the game play are the best yet from EA games.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  6. WannesdeB.
    Jan 20, 2005
    10
    Best game ever.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  7. ChrisB.
    Jan 9, 2005
    4
    Shoddy. That's the best word to describe it. In a year that saw Half-Life 2, Doom 3, Far Cry, and the Call of Duty expansion, Pacific Assault unfortunately looks terribly bad in comparison. Frustrating gameplay, average graphics (with a disproportionately slow framerate), serious bugs with scripting (events not happening when they should for example, forcing you to reload and replay entire levels), and graphics bugs (destroyed trucks dissapearing leaving bodies 'magically' suspended in mid-air). I should also mention the LAUGHABLY bad physics. Come on EA - tacking on some shoddy physics only makes the game look worse when compared to Far Cry and Half-Life 2. It's a shame that EA seems intent on burying some of their finest franchises (Medal of Honor, NHL, Need for Speed) with a lack of effort. Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault is one of the worst shooters of the year, and certainly one of the biggest disappointments. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  8. JeroenR.
    Mar 3, 2005
    4
    Average game with some nice epic battles, but the game itself ins't worthy of the name Medal Of Honor. Uninspired multiplayer maps, uninteresting gameplay and amazingly dumb flight levels. Safe yourself from this all-around avarage game and buy a good game.
    • 0 of 1 users said yes
  9. DanielB.
    Nov 4, 2004
    10
    Pros: I'm halfway through the game and am having a killer time. The characters and environments are right up there with Half Life 2 and Doom. The AI seems cool and the new medic system is brilliant. This is the first medal of honor game with a real story and surprisingly, it's making a nice difference for me, the writing seems like a movie. Cons: Loading times suck, but unlike some other games, it's worth the waiting. Multiplayer performance wasn't great but I have only tried a few servers. Overall: I'd definitley say this is the best medal of honor game yet. I'm glad I got the directors edition, even though EA didn't give me a choice, it has lots of cool stuff. Back to playing. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  10. IolL.
    Nov 7, 2004
    5
    It does not in any way live up to expectation... this is just more of the same. we've had shooters changing these last few months, and mohpa cannot hang in with farcry/halflife2.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  11. Lon
    Jan 12, 2005
    10
    Online rank system all players stats like in AAO.great!!!
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  12. LandoHelpMe
    Mar 2, 2005
    5
    Average release at best. AI suspect. Certain parts of the game were very scripted where you have to cross a specific line before the enemy activates. Not outright a bad thing, but when you deduce where the enemy will be, you have the spot targeted, and then the enemy shows up and basically has a free shot...frustrating. Just an example. Savvy gamers mature. With a willingness to spend hundreds if not thousands of bucks per year on gaming relative spends (sometimes you upgrade your machine(s) to run the new games), I expect the richness of experience of single and multiplayer games to improve with time. Realism is a big part of that experience. It's clear that EA is not keeping up with their customer base. Honestly, I can tell you of at least 15 people who have pretty much permanently moved away from purchasing EA games on any platform. I for one have not reached that point, but there are other companies offering much better products...and they're making it a pretty easy decision going forward. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  13. RonaldK.
    Nov 14, 2004
    10
    I don't know what some people look for in game or if they're into the rating one game against another, but I have had nothing but fun with this game. The fighting, movies and special effects are perfect fun. The music and weapons are just plain great. Feels like money well spent to me, so I don't see a reason not to give it a 10.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  14. JoshG.
    Nov 19, 2004
    10
    Easily the top Medal of Honor game yet. Unlike some I was disappointed with Doom 3, but thought Far Cry was the best fps to date. No more! Pacific Assault delivers from the very start and doesn't let up. Great visuals, story and sound. Just a lot of fun, period.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  15. BillM.
    Nov 25, 2004
    2
    An average game from an average development team. It is obvious that EALA has neither the creative vision nor elementary skill level required to create an interesting and compelling FPS. A few “features” of this game are atrocious net lag, poor collision detection, the SAME dated engine as all the other MoH games, and retarded enemy AI. This game is a shining example of how poorly skilled and utterly average EALA as a development team is. First, that pile o poo Rouge Agent and now this, congrats EA you managed to kill the life from two franchises at once. Nice one! The multiplayer is so badly unbalanced it’s pathetic. I mean MoH has never claimed to be a realistic game (not that it could EVER make that claim seriously) but this is such a laughable joke. This is not surprising when you consider that their multiplayer game designer has less than four years of actual DESIGN experience and oh yeah, he HATES multiplayer games...there’s a smart move. Nice one EA! Your brilliant management shines through yet again. How can anyone at EA expect this game to compete with HL2 Doom 3 or even the almost year old Far Cry? Hell as far as I’m concerned Call of Duty took the WW2 FPS shooter crown by force last year, and they aint ever giving it back. Another average release from EA...but are we really surprised? I’m not. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  16. BatmanMonkey
    Nov 4, 2004
    10
    wtf??? gamespot gave graphics 8...Greg Kasavin is really stupid...this game has amazing graphics...it deserved at least a 9...I dont care if ps2 has lower standards thats the same damn score they gave GTA San Andreas...that game has some sh**ty graphics.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  17. MR.MA
    Nov 16, 2006
    2
    This is no game, its a movie, you think ur gonna play an exiting game after a screen load and ur ready to fire up then u end up watching a movie for minuts which u can't skip (maybe there is a tweak to it but i dunno) . i know its a ww2 moment recreater type game but the guys at EA got too creative about it and spend alot of effort on the gameplay music (which is very annoying) and forgot who they were making the game for.. i mean any one or most people who buy a FPS game or any other action game expect to blow up things and do things they can't do in real life,and u end up suffering from lack of freedom in this game , and whats with the personalities of the game characters they are very soft and nice soliders.... solders are supposed to be aggresive like the ones in farcry hehe.. and i dunt believe they were that nice in the real life ww2. EA some how seems to have made the game for the actual ww2 heros, i'm talking about the 80-90 year old men that fought these battles,, not teens or midage gamers, and its defenately not for kids (M rated). this will be the first and last game i buy from EA.. I even prefer Code name eagle than this,, if any one still remembers that game. the graphics isnt that bad.. but they are not that good either and saying that i mean i dunt understand why its has bad framerates when i set every thing of graphics in the config as low as possible, i have a very good comp and farcry and other games fly on it. i'm giving this game 2/10 just for the story telling and music of it and not game play. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  18. Barishiman
    Nov 13, 2004
    3
    Again this is proof that EA can't raise the bar. MOH:PA brings a new graphic engine and it doesn't add up. The graphics are blurry during gameplay. I don't know if this was on purpose because of jungle conditions or just plain stupid. The AI is once again dumb. Your teammates do not respond to your commands nor do they help you out. Controls are slow or unresponsive. When firing at your enemies, you can waste over a clip because MOH:PA hitboxes are under rated and the damage system is pathetic. This game is a disgrace to the Medal of Honor francise. Only EA would support a worthless piece of junk. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  19. WilliamB.
    Nov 14, 2004
    9
    I've played the other wwii games on the PC and by far, this one has got it right. The arcade like call of duty just doesn't stand up to any part of Medal Of Honour. Loading times left something to be desired, so I'm removing one point for that. Otherwise, good show.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  20. Chimp
    Dec 26, 2004
    9
    Great graphics. Great singleplayer jungle fights. Great new medic system, and a good story too. Oh and the scenes are very good. The best part of everything is the multiplayer tho, especially Invasion. Its like DOD in the Pacific. Complaints? Too linear at times(sometimes its actually kinda freeform), easy difficulty isnt easy enough(for if you just want to zoom through the game and take it all in), and it can be buggy, like the way people can inexplicably be raised about 6 inches off the ground or occasional trees that arent connected to the ground. Besides that, an amazing game. Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  21. Nov 8, 2010
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The game is set in the rather unworn Pacific Theater. Unfortunatley that is - along with some other minor things - the probably only Pro I was able to set against a lot of Cons. Other things I liked: The medics are a welcomingly different approach to actually have yourself starting to manage the pleas for help and/or decrease the number of suicidal charges during a level. Usually I put on a certain number of those with the reassuring fact in the back of my head that there will be a med pack somewhere after. In MoHPA it either won't or will be very seldom. The tense atmosphere in the last campaign, the taking of Tarawa. The longer list of things I hated: The Graphics are outdated even for a 2004 release. I know there's a huge debate going on between players of Call of Duty and MoH about which franchise is better. In terms of graphics I would like to take side for CoD. Even the first 2003 release of CoD looks more decent than MoH. On a plus side CoD will support custom screen resolution and ratio settings (though through horrible textfile support), while MoHPA can be played 1600x1200, 4:3 max which looks you are fighting the Imperial Army of Curiously Short and Fat Japanese Men. There are some 16:9 resolutions supported but these being way below 1600x1200 resolution leaves you - using a big 16:10 display - fighting the Imperial Army of Japan (8bit Divisions). The choice which atrocity bothers you less is at least yours. The team AI is horrible. I simply gave up at a certain point trying to make them do something helpful and started to take care of every single thing by myself. Though I am aware that this is what I'm supposed to do as a player, I've had other shooters where my team mates would follow scripts that would at least be helpful to some extend. Let me give two examples of why fighting with the badass marines of MoHPA and being out on a bicycle ride with a bunch of retarded chimpanzees is not of noticable difference: If an attacking Hiroshi Japanimoto takes cover behind a tree or a crate, he is henceforth regarded as 'dug in'. This will be heralded every 10 seconds, leaving you to decide which of the 'fortified' infantry positions really need attention and which can be resolved by let's say throwing a coconut, toothbrush, some cotton pads or stepping one pace left and then shoot. Another heavily utilized tactic is to avoid attacking enemies by turning one's back, standing still and taking one for the team/country/the little green man in the head with the bare back. I saw this dumbassery on at least two different situations and then I had to stop because my tears of anger were putting out my second keyboard. This not only binds useful medic resources, it also puts Uncle Sam in a very bad light for telling a bunch of looneys to be a well-trained special task force. From this point on I spent the rest of the game not only securing all 12 hour positions of our platoon, taking one pace at a time but saving the game after every damn taken coconut tree for whatever stupidity one of the guys might come up with next (Note: I did not see one of them juggling birthday cakes on a unicycle but was expecting that every minute) The person who designed the flying levels needs to be put in a special place if he ever comes to game designer's hell. To be frank: I am not a huge fan of those vehicle levels regardless what shooter I am playing but if I have to do it, please let me do it in a way that does not leave me loosing all hopes of humanity and with an urge to stomp a kitten to death. First of all: The Mouse controls the plane instead of the obvious and well-functioning WASDs, which are set to control the rudders. Something you don't need to use in the entire level. The mouse controls are inverted (pulling the mouse back, lets the plane dive while pushing it forward will make it climb) and the plane itself behaves like a flying a box of oranges that where shot out of an diarrheic elephant's behind. Only worse. Also I encountered this nice glitch at the end of the mission when I was supposed to fly back to base and did not immediately joined my two (did I mention useless?) wing men but flying one more yaw roll, only to find myself being automatically drowned to death after some erratic radio messages, asking what the heck I was doing there. I was not expecting to be able to radio that I follow moron squad to the next waypoint but am for reasons of questionable game mechanics suddenly some 40 miles behind them, but I was also not expecting to be forced to play this motherlode from the last save point again. Fortunately (see above) I was already saving every flight mile at that point, but others should be warned. The last level itself suffers from the same illness a lot of last levels do: They are too short and way too easy. I don't wanna spoil too much on it, but basically letting a battleship do all the work does not justify the build up all other Tarawa Missions do beforehand. Expand
Metascore

Generally favorable reviews - based on 43 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 34 out of 43
  2. Negative: 0 out of 43
  1. 78
    If there had been more variation on mission type, enemy AI hadn't cheated, and the feel of the weapons had been more solid, the gameplay could have lived up the awesome presentation value that the rest of the package promised.
  2. It's got frenzied action, a thoughtful storyline, and gameplay that will swallow you whole.
  3. Perhaps it's because after countless other games, particularly Call of Duty, those once magnificent scenes of senseless destruction no longer have the impact they once did. Scripted sequences have perhaps gone as far as they can go with these games.