User Score
5.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 615 Ratings

User score distribution:
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Oct 16, 2013
    8
    Medal of Honor has always been one of my favourite franchises, especially for the story. Great single player experience however the bugs in multiplayer let the game down.
  2. Oct 27, 2012
    8
    Well I was a bit worried as this title was going down the road of COD, and being the between BF3/BF4 project using the same era and engine...but I liked the last MOH game so gave it a good run through last night. Basically the single player campaign is VERY GOOD, very much as good as Bad Company 2's was so thats a one up on BF3 straight away. The new leaning mechanics are a bit weird butWell I was a bit worried as this title was going down the road of COD, and being the between BF3/BF4 project using the same era and engine...but I liked the last MOH game so gave it a good run through last night. Basically the single player campaign is VERY GOOD, very much as good as Bad Company 2's was so thats a one up on BF3 straight away. The new leaning mechanics are a bit weird but are actually very handy once you get used to it... feels a bit like the Rainbow 6 vegas cover system without the wall locking, again **** tonne of weapons... more than BF3 and they feel less hobbled and more meaty when being used.

    So what about multiplayer? graphically a bit weaker than single player, but still pretty decent (running on my GTX580 in ultra) and felt very fluid if a little smudgey (probably a FXAA filter being used?). The maps are a right rabbit warren of cover and sneak zones, which feels a lot better than the previous MOH games open run and gun gamplay... although edge of map invisible walls is a bit noticeable in places, this feels very tactical in a Ghost Recon sort of way, sure it s a bit of a mashup of all 3 big name FPS games... and the majority of it works, it feels very fresh and the game modes are generally good. Maybe the reviewers should have used the massive patch fix before going into the game, 'cos to me this is a winner at least on PC, maybe not a BF3 beater but certainly up to anything I've seen from the CODMW/BOPS factory and worth a look... also bear in mind I had BF3 premium and got this game half price thanks to Origin's discount scheme. EA becoming customer friendly.... WTF next....lol
    Expand
  3. Feb 7, 2013
    10
    first i played cod black ops 2 becuase the review said this game is tarrible but after i played mohw i now know why a lot of people saying that battlefield and medal of honor are batter than call of duty i dont get it why this game get just 55/100 it should have get at least 87/100 i think that cod black ops 2 is good but this is way batter that bo2.acually i didnt like so much battlefieldfirst i played cod black ops 2 becuase the review said this game is tarrible but after i played mohw i now know why a lot of people saying that battlefield and medal of honor are batter than call of duty i dont get it why this game get just 55/100 it should have get at least 87/100 i think that cod black ops 2 is good but this is way batter that bo2.acually i didnt like so much battlefield 3 so i thought it will be the same but i was wrong buy it you can find it on amazon for just 30 bucks Expand
  4. Oct 24, 2012
    8
    MOHW single player is an uneven experience. The beginning levels, frankly, are very poor and reminds me of Shigeru Miyamoto's advice; design your first levels last. I played the campaign over two nights and pretty much all of the first 2/3rds of it was dreadful. Then, I got to the driving level which I thought was completely awesome and fresh, I hadn't seen anything like that in an FPSMOHW single player is an uneven experience. The beginning levels, frankly, are very poor and reminds me of Shigeru Miyamoto's advice; design your first levels last. I played the campaign over two nights and pretty much all of the first 2/3rds of it was dreadful. Then, I got to the driving level which I thought was completely awesome and fresh, I hadn't seen anything like that in an FPS before. The final level, unfortunately, was a pain - I had trouble completing the final breach and the checkpoint was pretty far back (not to mention a level bug that wouldn't allow me to move forward.) It just feels like they didn't play test the single player at all. Beyond this, the plot itself is pretty pedestrian. That's not to say that you can't make an exciting campaign from the subject matter, but I found reading Mark Owen's No Easy Day a heck of a lot more interesting than this. The player has to see at least a piece of themselves in the story's characters, and the plot isn't fleshed out enough or told in a compelling enough manner for the player to be able to relate to it on any level. If Danger Close doesn't hire a strong writer for the next game, they should probably skip the single player all together. That said, the multiplayer is just amazing. How can Danger Close produce a game that's not like anything else in the market? They ditched the multiplayer design of 2010's MOH and looked to EA's FIFA for inspiration (of all things). It's a clean tasting experience that goes down smooth and is totally satisfying. The player learns very quickly that they need to work with their assigned buddy to get anywhere, and the game is very facilitating in this regard - your Fireteam partner is auto-assigned, easy to find on the map and easy to follow around and coordinate with. My only complaint is that I wish MOHW had a way of listing former Fireteam buddies that are met randomly so that in case I have a good time playing with them I can easily add them to my Battlelog list of friends and find them next time I'm on. A missed opportunity, but maybe it'll be patched in. Anyway, get through the single player campaign as quickly as you can and move on to the multiplayer. Terrific game. Expand
  5. May 4, 2014
    10
    Over all this is really fun in the single player mode. The multi player is tones of fun as well. There are a few bugs throughout the game that can get pretty frustrating but over all this is was very fun game. Graphics are GREAT, story is pretty good, game-play and over all mechanics are smooth and well done. Personally i would say this is worth a buy.
  6. Oct 25, 2012
    8
    First of all, don't trust the critics' reviews for this game. It's a ton of fun. While it may not be very original, neither are the yearly increments in the Call of Duty series but critics always drool over those games. The 2-man fireteam system is a very fun dynamic and the overall feel of the game is pretty damn exciting. Plenty of customization and the neat option to choose fromFirst of all, don't trust the critics' reviews for this game. It's a ton of fun. While it may not be very original, neither are the yearly increments in the Call of Duty series but critics always drool over those games. The 2-man fireteam system is a very fun dynamic and the overall feel of the game is pretty damn exciting. Plenty of customization and the neat option to choose from several different special ops soldiers. Expand
  7. Feb 17, 2013
    8
    this is a really great game. it doesnt have major knew ideas that take it further than the standard modern shooters, but it is overall great. the game has a overall good and touching story, but it didnt do the famaily stuff as it was promised and in the end the family stuff was dull and not developed. the gameplay is great, and the guns feel great. the multiplayer is great too, and you diethis is a really great game. it doesnt have major knew ideas that take it further than the standard modern shooters, but it is overall great. the game has a overall good and touching story, but it didnt do the famaily stuff as it was promised and in the end the family stuff was dull and not developed. the gameplay is great, and the guns feel great. the multiplayer is great too, and you die here much more fast than other games, which makes you think before you run guns blazing. the big problem is that the multiplayer is buggy, not unplayable buggy but quite buggy. overall this is a great shooter and if you like modern shooters you should deffinetly buy it. it doesnt have a lot of knew ideas exept the fireteam buddy system but its still a really great game Expand
  8. Oct 26, 2012
    8
    Great atmosphere, solid game-play and great graphics. The Frostbite engine does it's job here. Compared to any Call of Duty game this game looks much better. The single-player campaign plays very smoothly. Don't expect any innovation though maybe except the car chase that feels like a real racing game. The multi-player is awesome and really makes players cooperate.
  9. Oct 31, 2012
    8
    Warfighter is another shooter with lots of explosions and spectacle. It matches the pace set by other popular shooter titles, so in that respect it accomplished what it set out to do. Compared to the previous game last year the story seems a little more over the top, where as the earlier game seemed a tad bit more down to earth, but none the less it is still a fun ride. That said IWarfighter is another shooter with lots of explosions and spectacle. It matches the pace set by other popular shooter titles, so in that respect it accomplished what it set out to do. Compared to the previous game last year the story seems a little more over the top, where as the earlier game seemed a tad bit more down to earth, but none the less it is still a fun ride. That said I wouldn't really recommend it as a purchase, the multi-player is decent but with Black Ops 2 around the corner I can only suggest Medal of Honor: Warfighter as a rental. Expand
  10. Mar 30, 2016
    10
    EA Please continue The Series
    I liked MOH WARFIGHTER CampaignN,ITS THRILLING.
    I Dont know Why it GOT NEGATIVE REVIEWS
    GRAPHICS ARE AWSOME,STORY IS AWSOME,DRVING IS AWSOME,ACTION IS AWSOME.

    CONTINUE THE SERIES PLEASE........
  11. Apr 20, 2013
    9
    I bought Moh:W 3-4 days ago. And i started playing MP firstly. I loved all weapon custom system. There are much more camo than COD series. Also, 6 classes. Classes are pretty good. I haven't understood kill streak system yet. In SP, my game frozen sniper chapter. I will continue tonight... Til sniper part, game was perfect for me.
    In MP, MP7 weapon is OVERPOWERED, i think. As you can
    I bought Moh:W 3-4 days ago. And i started playing MP firstly. I loved all weapon custom system. There are much more camo than COD series. Also, 6 classes. Classes are pretty good. I haven't understood kill streak system yet. In SP, my game frozen sniper chapter. I will continue tonight... Til sniper part, game was perfect for me.
    In MP, MP7 weapon is OVERPOWERED, i think. As you can see, so less recoil while shooting. That's why %70 percent of players prefer Spec Ops class. Point Man class remained me "What is that class?" impression.
    Overall, my score is 7. People might not like this game, but 5.3 score is less than Moh:W deserved.
    Expand
  12. Oct 26, 2012
    8
    I'm a single player-only player and I must admit the campaign is, well, relatively short.
    However, Danger Close did a great job on bringing the unnamed heroes concept into the story
    Also, the details of the game is great. The SFX are great.
    This might not be the best shooter I've ever played but I definitely had a great time with it.
  13. Jul 31, 2014
    8
    I really love this game! Love the characters, and almost everything about it. There is not much variety of the gamplay, this is my only complain. I Beat it on Tier1 difficulty for the second time, it was one hell of a job! Never play on easy! Games like this, is bad on easy difficulty. Even on normal is boring for me. No tension. But hard diff... and tier1.. Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, andI really love this game! Love the characters, and almost everything about it. There is not much variety of the gamplay, this is my only complain. I Beat it on Tier1 difficulty for the second time, it was one hell of a job! Never play on easy! Games like this, is bad on easy difficulty. Even on normal is boring for me. No tension. But hard diff... and tier1.. Ghost Recon, Rainbow Six, and Medal of Honor Rulez! Expand
  14. Oct 25, 2012
    9
    I think the one thing EA about MoH failed at was to explain to it's purchasers what the game is. If you played the last version, well you should know. This game IS on the Frostbite 2 engine, but that doesn't mean it's going to be the same time of game as Battlefield 3 is. (just think back to all the games that utilize Unreal 3 engine)

    This game is best described as EA's competition
    I think the one thing EA about MoH failed at was to explain to it's purchasers what the game is. If you played the last version, well you should know. This game IS on the Frostbite 2 engine, but that doesn't mean it's going to be the same time of game as Battlefield 3 is. (just think back to all the games that utilize Unreal 3 engine)

    This game is best described as EA's competition to Call of Duty. Some people think Battlefield 3 is. No way, Battlefield 3 is in no way like CoD. That's what Medal of Honor Warfighter is for. Battlefield 3 is very expansive and more like an open world battlefield (and vehicles). Whereas this game is much more along defined paths, but with a decent amount of nooks/crannies to flank opponents.

    I like CoD, but I think there is room for many types of FPS/TPS. Of one type is MoH.

    It's got great graphics. Not perfect, but it's also a different style of game. It's not an expansive map, it's on a smaller scale like CoD. I play the game at ultra settings, so the game looks really good. Again not perfect, but very nice. Thus like CoD it is a game where you have to traverse either fast and risk getting killed, or slowly and surely. It's alot like CoD, but also got it's own flavor. It's hard to quantify, because BF3 is such a different experience that most games default to 'more like CoD'. Because anything that's not like BF3 is more like CoD. The gunplay is good. Though I've only used a few, they seem good. I can deal with the kickback of guns, that's what they do. But also I realize that not all guns are the same, there's lots of different classes with different guns and unlocks to customize the gear that needs to be unlocked, so it's still early for even those that hate the kickback to rail on about all the guns having too much. Unlock some more guns, try different classes, as well as the attachments, and you might find more guns to your specific type of play and desire.

    So when I say CoD is similar to it, it's because it is. But again it's also quite a bit different. So the people that are saying it's not CoD and those that are saying it's like CoD are both right. It is both like and unlike CoD. Doesn't seem to be quite as demanding on the gfx card. Close but not as much. (of course that's without any new nvidia drivers). But I'm easily getting 60 fps with max settings with a GTX 670 and an i7 920 @ 4ghz. So it's very playable. I'm getting the impression about the destruction elements that these are going to be reserved for later games on the Frostbite 2 engine, when more and newer/better graphics cards are out and installed in the user base. While the Nvidia 6XX and the ATI equivalent probably could handle it, most people are still using Nvidia 4xx and 5xx (and ATI equivalent) tech, so I can understand why the destruction isn't there. Plus it makes more sense in a BF series than a MoH series as people would just clear the buildings and every map would end up 'open'. Still would be nice to have some, but I can understand why it's not there. I'd expect BF4 to possibly finally do what they wanted on this note and really up the destruction.

    Again having played both the beta on 360 and now the PC version, the two graphically aren't even close to each other. The PC version on ultra is vastly superior to the 360 beta. While I haven't played the PC version of CoD, the 360 version is laughably inferior compared to PC MoH on ultra settings. Huge difference.

    This review is about the multiplayer, not the single player. While most people trashed the single player of CoD and BF3 for being short, it seems most are saying MoH is short as well. So things are pretty equal, except without some of the better unique moments seen in the others. You can use your 360 controller or obviously KB+M, or even a hybrid of 360 controller in place of WSAD on the keyboard and mouse for precision and quick aiming. Overall this game is fun, it's a shame people are dragging this game's score down because of

    a) They somehow incredibly got the idea that this game was going to be like BF3 (how I don't know)
    b) Those that thought that, generally hate CoD, and thus don't like this game
    c) Bought a game known for playing multiplayer and yet hate on the barely used and cared about SP and just like it's peers, its a short campaign
    d) are playing the game at lower than ultra settings and don't think it looks good

    If you knew what to expect from this game, and don't have a hate fest for CoD, and don't care much for SP portions of FPS (me I NEVER play the single player campaigns of online multiplayer shooters)...then you should like this game and find it quite good. Torn between giving it an 8 or 9 (because it takes a great game to be 10), but since everyone is hating on it because they thought the game was something else when clearly it wasn't going to be BF3, I'm going with 9.
    Expand
  15. Oct 23, 2012
    8
    The game's campaign has been very good. I do not know why i see some idiots (Yes, sorry for words) saying ''Linear'' because this is where you fail at knowing what is a Medal of Honor game, it is a Real mission, or atleast 90% Based on a Real Military Operation (Just like MOH 2010).. So maybe it's nothing new, and ? It talks about reality, not a COD run in the bunch and berserk killThe game's campaign has been very good. I do not know why i see some idiots (Yes, sorry for words) saying ''Linear'' because this is where you fail at knowing what is a Medal of Honor game, it is a Real mission, or atleast 90% Based on a Real Military Operation (Just like MOH 2010).. So maybe it's nothing new, and ? It talks about reality, not a COD run in the bunch and berserk kill everyone... As for Multiplayer maybe the maps could be a bit bigger, otherwise the game is all fine for me. Was just willing to give those calling the Campaign ''Linear'' a good and big laugh. Anyways, if you like Real Military Stories, that is what MOH has always been made for. If you want Rambo super-crap without Realism, go play COD. Have fun ! Expand
  16. Mar 28, 2013
    8
    Nice shooter, story was well... uhm... not the best, lots of action, but 2 missions in single where you gotta drive.Red dot sight looked like s**t, copying too much from COD MW series, too short single gameplay, and Frostbite 2 is very bad optimized in this game.Everything else was prety good though.
  17. Oct 29, 2012
    9
    (Multiplayer only review!!!) Am glad I didn't wait for the reviews before getting this game! It's tense, exciting, visceral and hard to master. The recoil and real feel of combat in MOH2010 is back, perhaps not quite as well done here, but still the best around, better than BF3. Doesn't look quite as polished as BF3 with some of the avatars in some light conditions, though the environments(Multiplayer only review!!!) Am glad I didn't wait for the reviews before getting this game! It's tense, exciting, visceral and hard to master. The recoil and real feel of combat in MOH2010 is back, perhaps not quite as well done here, but still the best around, better than BF3. Doesn't look quite as polished as BF3 with some of the avatars in some light conditions, though the environments are just as good, and sometimes (in sunlight conditions) it looks photoreal and is unsurpassed. The maps are smaller than BF3, sometimes you can't climb on/over things you hope to like you can in BF3 and was a bit disappointed about this, but here is the real crux of the game. It's the only game where you better watch your buddy's 6! It requires you to be on the ball and careful, so don't even mention COD in the same breath. This is an amazing experience which will reward team play like no other. the precision is amazing. Within these smaller maps you really experience almost non-stop the infinity of possibilities of combat in 3D! The many decisions you make will mean the difference and run and gunners will not like it so much! I have had no probs with collision detection. The user interface is a bit confusing, also the nations, VOIP, team member nationality / squad choices, but not poor and archaic like Ghost Recon FS. Buy it if you are up for a challenge, this requires skill and you will find your time rewarded! Highly addictive and not fantasy like BF3. Recommended. Expand
  18. Jun 25, 2016
    8
    Definitely NOT the worst game i ever played as many have said? I got this for $8 and for the campaign
    i actually really like it. For story and feel it is much better than the shallow,lousy story Call of duty games
    out there. This game is NOT as bad as reviews made it out to be? I had a lot of fun playing this, When i heard they took this series out of production i was bummed
    Definitely NOT the worst game i ever played as many have said? I got this for $8 and for the campaign
    i actually really like it. For story and feel it is much better than the shallow,lousy story Call of duty games
    out there. This game is NOT as bad as reviews made it out to be? I had a lot of fun playing this,
    When i heard they took this series out of production i was bummed because i really love war games but do not like Call of Duty's venture into the space age they have gone! and Battlefield is more about multiplayer,
    The graphics look really good for the year this game was made and the voice acting is much better than most war games i have played,
    overall IF you play campaigns and you can get this for around $10 i would recommend it.
    yes it is a short campaign(about 6-1/2 hours) but it is fun if you are into a good story and playing as a spec op's soldier. This game is a lot better than the new Homefront revolution and that game is $60!
    Expand
  19. Oct 28, 2012
    8
    You have to give this game (campaign mode) a chance to progress. It doesn't start off well and can put you off easily. The story is great and the gameplay improves immensely. The guns feel more real than any other game. The addition of some vehicle chase action added a welcome change to the game pace. I felt like I was playing Need For Speed. I really enjoyed that. Unfortunately, it isYou have to give this game (campaign mode) a chance to progress. It doesn't start off well and can put you off easily. The story is great and the gameplay improves immensely. The guns feel more real than any other game. The addition of some vehicle chase action added a welcome change to the game pace. I felt like I was playing Need For Speed. I really enjoyed that. Unfortunately, it is not a well polished game and at times felt like an arcade game, particularly gunning down well marked targets on the ground from a chopper. Overall, the story was moving and the game just got better as I played it. It does deserve a good score and it does deserve to be played. Expand
  20. Oct 28, 2012
    9
    Have been playing for about three days now, mostly multiplayer. I started off getting really frustrated with the maps, gun play etc and pretty much rage quit after the first hour, was going to uninstall even. But had another go, and as weapons are unlocking and the attachments are made available its opens up and I'm totally loving it now. I play these games for gun play mainly, it needs toHave been playing for about three days now, mostly multiplayer. I started off getting really frustrated with the maps, gun play etc and pretty much rage quit after the first hour, was going to uninstall even. But had another go, and as weapons are unlocking and the attachments are made available its opens up and I'm totally loving it now. I play these games for gun play mainly, it needs to feel like the actual weapon, ballistics etc, and they have nailed it here I think. The weapon customization screen and models are perfect as well. Sound is fantastic by the way, best shooter for that.

    I really dig how they have represented all the spec ops teams around the world, you can see the effort DC have put in here and I like this realism factor (ok its a game i know, but they haven't made it over the top like other games which I think is a plus).

    The graphics, I've got everything on ultra (i7, 470, 8gig) and its easily 60fps. Some of the textures are a bit washed out in places, but other scenes look amazing so its had to call. Overall the detail in the levels is really good, a bit more destructibility would have been nice though, but it does exist.

    The maps are a mix, some I love and others seem a little unbalanced. Hopefully a map pack or two coming down the track. Grenades are very had to predict, would like the warning to work a little better.

    But to sum up some of the best, intense fire fights I've ever played in in FPS.
    Expand
  21. Oct 23, 2012
    10
    OMG! Compared to MOH2010, Warfighter is a huge success. The graphic is awesome and gameplay improved a lot -- fast paced but different from COD. And gun models are perfect!!! Good job Danger Close! This is exactly what we want!
  22. Oct 27, 2012
    8
    I would give MOH WF multiplayer 7.5.
    It has well balanced and diversified class specialties, weapon customization. It doesn't quite play like all time run 'n gun COD nor plays like all time hard tactical shooter like ghost recon or rainbow six. It has some good mixture of both nature of the shooters.
    At the same time, it has solid hit detection, good enough player base 24/7, built in
    I would give MOH WF multiplayer 7.5.
    It has well balanced and diversified class specialties, weapon customization. It doesn't quite play like all time run 'n gun COD nor plays like all time hard tactical shooter like ghost recon or rainbow six. It has some good mixture of both nature of the shooters.
    At the same time, it has solid hit detection, good enough player base 24/7, built in VOIP, teamplay promotin buddy system. Overall play experience of MOH WF MP was that it's pretty robust and solid all around. In short, if you like tactical shooter like rainbow six and still want something a bit arcadey, or if you got tired of all too arcadey run 'n gun shooter, this game would suit your needs. BUT! might be a little too expensive for ppl who's not so much enthusiastic about tactical shooter to pay the full retail price.
    Expand
  23. Nov 15, 2012
    8
    I love this game what can I say, at first I thought oh god this just another COD but its not its just that people where trying to play it that way. I think a lot of the disappointment about this game is that people expected cod done in frostbite 2 or battlefield 3 but infantry only and when they found out that its not either of those they got upset and gave it bad reviews. The fire teamI love this game what can I say, at first I thought oh god this just another COD but its not its just that people where trying to play it that way. I think a lot of the disappointment about this game is that people expected cod done in frostbite 2 or battlefield 3 but infantry only and when they found out that its not either of those they got upset and gave it bad reviews. The fire team buddy system actively promotes team play and if you play with a friend you really see how the mechanic can work. The game isn't without its problems of course the ability to change fire teams while in game is sadly missing, the voip doesn't work or works very badly, launching from battlelog causes issues such as load outs being reset and key binds also being reset. Some users have issues with crashes but others have none which suggests that the issues may not solely be with the game but of course no user will ever admit that it might be there system at fault. Just because you have a high end PC does not make it perfect.

    Should you buy this game that would depend on what your expecting, I have read numerous soldiers say how the guns are the most authentic they have seen and the maps I believe are based on on real world operations locations and so yes they might have choke points but in war I'm guessing a soldier runs into a few of those. So maybe the game is authentic after all and isn't that what they promised in the advertisements?
    If you are looking for COD done in Frostbite 2 then this isn't for you if your looking for BF3 but infantry only then stick to BF3 and play infantry only maps. If you are looking for something that's a little different but not totally unlike anything else you have ever played this may be for you.
    Expand
  24. Oct 26, 2012
    8
    Seems these so called critics have been drinking too much of the COD cool-aid and thinks any other shooter is ass.If u liked the first one,u will definitely enjoy this one.
  25. Oct 23, 2012
    10
    I am a HUGE FPS gamer that was incredibly disappointed with the 2010 MoH and was apprehensive about picking this one up...boy am i glad I did. The class system is great, the graphics are beautiful on max settings. Very fast paced, the gun play feels better than CoDs, fireteams is great. Overall feels like a very polished multiplayer experience and I can't wait to check out the singleI am a HUGE FPS gamer that was incredibly disappointed with the 2010 MoH and was apprehensive about picking this one up...boy am i glad I did. The class system is great, the graphics are beautiful on max settings. Very fast paced, the gun play feels better than CoDs, fireteams is great. Overall feels like a very polished multiplayer experience and I can't wait to check out the single player missions!! 9/10. Expand
  26. Nov 14, 2012
    8
    hello to all,
    i dont know why so low score, i liked it very much i think its short but right to the point
    no nonsense but a good FPS!!!
    if your 35 years old you have a different perspective.
    as you know time is money so i like short FPS games but quality is a must!!!
    so if you are in my category you must play this game i can insure you will enjoy it
  27. Mar 13, 2013
    8
    Not sure why this game gets such low reviews... I can only think that most reviews are on the console as the PC version is smooth and bug free. I got way over 60FPS constantly.
    The game looks great and while not totally amazing, its pretty good. Graphics are good, weapons and controls are good. Even the driving sequences which I found a bit boring were still good (must've borrowed some
    Not sure why this game gets such low reviews... I can only think that most reviews are on the console as the PC version is smooth and bug free. I got way over 60FPS constantly.
    The game looks great and while not totally amazing, its pretty good. Graphics are good, weapons and controls are good. Even the driving sequences which I found a bit boring were still good (must've borrowed some code from the NFS game)
    Single player is a bit short in my mind. I'm about to try Black Ops 2 to compare but not looking forward to low graphics LOL
    Expand
  28. Jan 15, 2017
    10
    i like voices in game. Voices has been
    impressive. it has effective
    scenario. But
    Playability can be better. i can't become aware when playing. Generally
    fluent.
  29. Oct 23, 2012
    10
    Warfighter is one of the best shooters of this year, the Campaing may be a bit short, but it's way better than Battlefield 3 Campaign. The Graphics are Amazind, Sound of Guns are great, and the Multiplayer is Awesome.
  30. Oct 23, 2012
    9
    As far as the gameplay, it definitely takes some getting use to. Especially if you are use to BF3 like me. After a few games though I was really enjoying myself, but I did have a good partner to buddy up with, which is a must for victory and high kill rates. Graphics wise there are aspects that looked better in BF3 and other things that looked better in MOH. -Plant life looks better in MOHAs far as the gameplay, it definitely takes some getting use to. Especially if you are use to BF3 like me. After a few games though I was really enjoying myself, but I did have a good partner to buddy up with, which is a must for victory and high kill rates. Graphics wise there are aspects that looked better in BF3 and other things that looked better in MOH. -Plant life looks better in MOH
    -Indoor lighting was better in MOH (almost a Metro 2033 look and shine to the lights!) Red dot receptacle & mussel flash also has a more realistic look and glare to it.
    -Structural and gun textures I give it to BF3
    -Sunlight glare also to BF3.

    Sounds were kind of a hit and miss for me and my 5.1 headphones. Some guns sounded too hallow, other were right on. But bullets sounds where amazing. You can hear them whizzing by you head very clearly and gave you a sense of rush and adrenaline. Foot steps also sounds much more realistic than BF3.

    In general I give the game an 9/10. It's map layout has close, tight corners similar to BF3 CQ, but with a different style. If you like BF3 large open maps with many vehicles stay way. If you like non-stop action, close quarter style, hand to hand combat its a great shooter to add to the collection.
    Expand
Metascore
55

Mixed or average reviews - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 30
  2. Negative: 6 out of 30
  1. PC PowerPlay
    Dec 2, 2012
    30
    Plot holes, broken scripting and offensive self-contradiction makes Warfighter one of the worst games we've played all year. [Dec 2012, p.85]
  2. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Nov 30, 2012
    60
    Common military shooter with minor technical bugs shows all the elements we have seen before. We've expected much more from the legendary Medal of Honor series. [Dec 2012]
  3. CD-Action
    Nov 29, 2012
    50
    Due to unreliable scripts and other technical issues, bland and chaotic storytelling and stupid AI I played Warfighter strictly out of obligation and not for fun. Decent (but unbalanced) multiplayer is not enough to put other label than 'mediocre' on a game that was supposed to be a major hit. [13/2012, p.36]