Medal of Honor: Warfighter PC

User Score
5.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 595 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 23, 2012
    4
    Very boring FPS (typical **** from Electronic arts). Typical arcade FPS with low realism and the typical theme about killing "bad terrorists". The game is nothing knew for the genre and the single player part is very boring and run-of-the-mill
  2. Mar 3, 2013
    4
    The Singleplayer is just what you'd expect from any military FPS game now a days. No, seriously, that's all I can say about it.
    If you played any Call of Duty or any other Military FPS with regenerating health and team mates that slow down your progress, you've played this game's singleplayer.
    The graphics are alright, sound design is average and the driving missions are actually pretty
    The Singleplayer is just what you'd expect from any military FPS game now a days. No, seriously, that's all I can say about it.
    If you played any Call of Duty or any other Military FPS with regenerating health and team mates that slow down your progress, you've played this game's singleplayer.
    The graphics are alright, sound design is average and the driving missions are actually pretty fun. But it's only 4-5 hours long, so there's not a whole lot of content that you can get out of it.
    Multiplayer is....pretty much the same thing you'd expect from any other military shooters with classes and unlocks. Gun play is decent enough, but the map design is just horrible and feels sloppily thought out. There's pretty much no open spaces, everything is tight and cornered.
    You're better off playing TDM on Battlefield 3. All I can say is that I'm glad that I got this game at a reduced price.
    Expand
  3. Oct 29, 2012
    4
    New type of review:

    1. From load-to-gameplay (-3): - Unskippable opening splash screens (Company/Game/Engine logos etc.). - 4 menus to gameplay: - "Origin Login" (could've been done in backgroung), - "Press enter" (We can all agree that this menu can be wipped out of the face of gaming, once and for all), - Singleplayer/Multiplayer etc. options menu, -
    New type of review:

    1. From load-to-gameplay (-3): - Unskippable opening splash screens (Company/Game/Engine logos etc.). - 4 menus to gameplay: - "Origin Login" (could've been done in backgroung), - "Press enter" (We can all agree that this menu can be wipped out of the face of gaming, once and for all), - Singleplayer/Multiplayer etc. options menu, - New game/continue etc. options menu. - Absence of option to instant "quit to desktop" from gameplay. - Longer waiting times, from load to gameplay due to all the above. - The many menus (2 or 3 level menus) and options increase/add to the general clutter.

    2. Cutscenes/Loading screens/Gameplay (-2): - Unskippable cutscenes. - Unpausable cutscenes. - Difference between the cutscenes and gameplay video/graphics takes away deeper game immersion. - Transitions from gameplay-to-cutscenes-and-gameplay-again are rough/bad and instant without any fade in/out music or theme part. - Very bad women characters models.The men models were generic but OK for a FPS, but the women were just plain awful. - THE BEARDS.

    3. Unfinished/Rushed-out feeling (-1)

    -------------------------------------------------------- - Gameplay (6) - Graphics/Video (8) - Music/Audio (4) - Story (2) - Character Connection (2) - Overall game immersion (2) - Drama (2) - Action (6.5) - OVERALL (4) - Recomended Yes/No (No)
    Expand
  4. Jun 9, 2013
    4
    this game is awful. just dont buy it.
    singleplayer is just enemies popping out of cover and waiting to get shot for 5 hours.
    multiplayer is boring and doesnt offer anything new.
  5. Nov 13, 2012
    4
    An utterly uninspiring game that unfortunately will follow in the footsteps of the first and into my recycle bin. The campaign throws up very little of a challenge and can easily be completed in one medium sitting on the computer, however, will you be bothered to finish the campaign is another story entirely. I had to force myself to finish the game just to see if it got any better andAn utterly uninspiring game that unfortunately will follow in the footsteps of the first and into my recycle bin. The campaign throws up very little of a challenge and can easily be completed in one medium sitting on the computer, however, will you be bothered to finish the campaign is another story entirely. I had to force myself to finish the game just to see if it got any better and unfortunately it didn't. Trying to carve a niche in the FPS market is difficult and you would think borrowing ideas from Battlefield and Call of Duty you could come up with a winning formulae, MOHW has proved that it is not that simple. This game is not worth spending any money on, there are much better examples and attempts at FPS on the Free to Play market. Expand
  6. Nov 29, 2012
    4
    I just finished the campaign and it was pretty terrible. I feel that they tried to cater to the Call Of Duty fans by desperately incorporating various mechanics and scenes.

    Mechanics are wonky and all over the place. There is like.. 3 guns or something in the campaign and that disappointed me very much. Well not 3 guns exactly but there were so few. And most of them are bad. Story is
    I just finished the campaign and it was pretty terrible. I feel that they tried to cater to the Call Of Duty fans by desperately incorporating various mechanics and scenes.

    Mechanics are wonky and all over the place. There is like.. 3 guns or something in the campaign and that disappointed me very much. Well not 3 guns exactly but there were so few. And most of them are bad.

    Story is confusing and is your typical "'MERICA YEAH TERRORISTS BLOW THEMSELVES UP!!!" middle-eastern shoot-em up. You go to one area, fight a wave of dudes, go to another, fight another wave etc, very COD like.

    Haven't tried MP yet, but I didn't get it for the MP. I also heard the MP is just as bad.

    I did like the part where they tried to honor the soldier and keep it authentic. When you reload you actually don't rack the slide if you already have a round in the chamber, neato.

    All in all, the game is pretty ****
    Expand
  7. Apr 5, 2014
    4
    I got this game for $5, so I guess I can't complain--I got what I paid for. But this sequel is much worse than its predecessor. While the first MOH had a fairly simple and believable story: soldiers hunting down targets in Afghanistan, this game tries (and fails) to be like COD: MW, with a lot of different locales and big, bad plots to blow up the world. It also introduces a lot ofI got this game for $5, so I guess I can't complain--I got what I paid for. But this sequel is much worse than its predecessor. While the first MOH had a fairly simple and believable story: soldiers hunting down targets in Afghanistan, this game tries (and fails) to be like COD: MW, with a lot of different locales and big, bad plots to blow up the world. It also introduces a lot of cuteness and *tries* to use them to develop characters, but ti's all very bland stereotypical nonsense that we've seen a million times. Gameplay wise, this game introduces a few interesting features (such as different breaching methods and alternate optics), but they cannot redeem it. Most missions are clunky and poorly designed, with plenty of bugs. A few missions are kinda interesting, but they can't make up for the many other frustrating hoops you'll have to jump through, Expand
  8. Nov 5, 2012
    4
    Another linear FPS game like Call of Duty series & Battlefield series. Explosions, Car chases, I've seen most of it in movies. The plot is too overused.
  9. Oct 28, 2012
    4
    Single Player bit:
    I actually really enjoyed the first Moh from Danger Close. It was more realistic then CoD story was not hollywoodish and gameplay was good. My expectations were more or less the same maybe a bit higher since the game was moving to Frostbite 2 and seeing what BF3 could deliver, I think that expectation was not ungrounded.
    Unfortunatly those expectations got blown after
    Single Player bit:
    I actually really enjoyed the first Moh from Danger Close. It was more realistic then CoD story was not hollywoodish and gameplay was good. My expectations were more or less the same maybe a bit higher since the game was moving to Frostbite 2 and seeing what BF3 could deliver, I think that expectation was not ungrounded.
    Unfortunatly those expectations got blown after 30 minutes of playing.
    First : This is Frostbite 2? Why is it that BF3 looks a million times better, plays better and has a better feel to it.
    Then the AI of the uber Tier 1 operatives is so bad, that I actually have been backstabbed by enemies alot of times because my AI teammates can't kill or hit anything and the enemies just run through our lines....
    Also it seems Danger Close knows something about the tech of the US army that we don't.
    Wood is the new über kevlar, you cannot penetrate it with any weapon.
    I though a full auto shotgun should be able to shred plywood without too much trouble.
    I'm half way through the game and honestly I can't be bothered to continue. WORST GAME in the last 5 years...

    The multiplayer isn't bad but nowhere as good as BF3 or CoD to be honest...
    Anyway this game is not worth the 50
    Expand
  10. Nov 4, 2012
    4
    "So played MOH DoorFighter .. Completed the Campaign.. Its poor and repetitive but visually stunning. The Multiplayer is all the worst bits of COD with the hit reg of BF3 and some weird ass random spawning on most levels.. 4/10 at best.. Don't waste your ££" 1 hour ago
  11. Nov 4, 2012
    4
    EA:
    I'm getting really disappointed with your company these days. The games you are releasing these days have so many day 0 bugs it's just unforgivable. I am NOT going to pre-order anymore games from you anymore until you get their act straight. Your "ohh-shinny-extra-dogtags" pre-order tricks won't work.
    Want to know why I'm pissed? I have the game installed on an SSD. S. S. D.
    EA:
    I'm getting really disappointed with your company these days. The games you are releasing these days have so many day 0 bugs it's just unforgivable. I am NOT going to pre-order anymore games from you anymore until you get their act straight. Your "ohh-shinny-extra-dogtags" pre-order tricks won't work.

    Want to know why I'm pissed? I have the game installed on an SSD. S. S. D. When the game first boots up and displays the EA logo with big explosions, it becomes CHOPPY? WHAT? This is even BEFORE I get to the main menu? How can this part even LAG?

    The single player campaign doesn't even LAST any longer than 5 hours! I understand the focus is more on multiplayer but 5 HOURS? C'mon! Speaking of single player campaign, it was so buggy it wasn't even funny. There were many times where the friendly AI would tell me to move up while they're stuck in a spot 2 checkpoints behind me! So much for your whole team concept BS that you try to sell in your story. There was also this one point in the game where the video would freeze and everybody and their brothers were complaining in the forums about it. Once again, the community had to bail you out of that one and come up with ingenious ways of resolving YOUR bugs.

    The quality of your games just gets worst with every iteration. About the only thing that you have right these days is your frostbite 2 engine. And the sad part is, every complaint that I've made in this review applied to BF3. Obviously, you guys do not listen very well to your community... and you wonder why COD sells better. Pfft..
    Expand
  12. Apr 3, 2013
    4
    As a gaming Vet if you say Medal of Honor i think Awesome single player war game Medal of Honor: Warfighter did not really do it for me the single player looks nice but didn't shout Epic at me at all and the multiplayer lost me lol ..
    I don't know what there trying to do with MoH but hopefully they`ll learn.
  13. Mar 22, 2013
    4
    Well, I've played this game and... based on I'm a campaign-game maniac... this was... a bit frustrating... LOTS OF THINGS and scenes remembered to CoD MW series and BF3. Good graphics with video resolution problems (like OUT OF RANGE while video starts)... At beginning confusing controls... control options are not well build (based on MY OWN experience) And the story... pff... I don't knowWell, I've played this game and... based on I'm a campaign-game maniac... this was... a bit frustrating... LOTS OF THINGS and scenes remembered to CoD MW series and BF3. Good graphics with video resolution problems (like OUT OF RANGE while video starts)... At beginning confusing controls... control options are not well build (based on MY OWN experience) And the story... pff... I don't know what to say... Yea, looks like the 2nd part of the last MoH with Rabbit but I watched at the beginning it was a bit hurried... i don't know how to express exactly. At last, it was a notable deception for me. Pretty guns, good effects, nice jokes and commentaries, bad guys killed me through concrete walls and materials when I couldn't shoot at them... so, a deception. I hoped it was better game. Therefore the control is a bit rough, I don't know, but all EA Games has a millisecond retard to respond the key-push that creeps my nerves...
    I just give them a 4.
    Expand
  14. Oct 24, 2012
    3
    A mix of the worst game design decisions in first-person shooters for last 10 years. Even Call of Duty manages to deliver better SP than this. Damn, even MoH 2010 SP was better in some ways. MP feels boring too, not much difference from 2010. I don't know why EA tries to "re-launch" MoH franchise and makes same mistake a second time. If you want to re-launch, make at least decent game, notA mix of the worst game design decisions in first-person shooters for last 10 years. Even Call of Duty manages to deliver better SP than this. Damn, even MoH 2010 SP was better in some ways. MP feels boring too, not much difference from 2010. I don't know why EA tries to "re-launch" MoH franchise and makes same mistake a second time. If you want to re-launch, make at least decent game, not this crap. Expand
  15. Nov 11, 2012
    3
    I wasn't even planning on getting this game, but it was discounted, and a friend urged me to. The lesson is twofold: there is a reason it was half off less than a month after release, and my friends are stupid. The single player campaign is forgettable, yet somehow manages to be tedious despite only being 5 hours long. All Warfighter really has going for it is a degree of authenticity, butI wasn't even planning on getting this game, but it was discounted, and a friend urged me to. The lesson is twofold: there is a reason it was half off less than a month after release, and my friends are stupid. The single player campaign is forgettable, yet somehow manages to be tedious despite only being 5 hours long. All Warfighter really has going for it is a degree of authenticity, but when you view it through the prism of a supersoldier with regenerating health and unlimited ammo, it reduces the experience by a large degree. My point is this: Warfighter should have been a tactical shooter like Rainbow 6, not a Call of Duty clone. There are also a load of bugs. Multiplayer *looks* alright, and customization *looks* cool. I say looks because I am disconnected within 10 seconds of joining every match. Fun! Origin and the Battlelog are just as terrible as ever. Expand
  16. Nov 10, 2012
    3
    Single player is a joke. The story is stupid and uninteresting. It's an interactive shooting gallery. I wonder, why the studio even spend time on developing the single player campaign. They should have it invested in the multiplayer part of the game. Anyway, I bought it for multiplayer, which has potential for fun. The idea of the fire team is good. And I had some fun until cheaters got toSingle player is a joke. The story is stupid and uninteresting. It's an interactive shooting gallery. I wonder, why the studio even spend time on developing the single player campaign. They should have it invested in the multiplayer part of the game. Anyway, I bought it for multiplayer, which has potential for fun. The idea of the fire team is good. And I had some fun until cheaters got to the game and destroyed it. Wallhacks and aimbots seem to be the standard on each server. And with the bad scores, EA is likely to drop support on this game fast. Two other frustrating things: The game crashes often. Playing through Battlelog is impossible because of bugs. Secondly, the menu system is really bad. The game is clearly unfinished, There are so much issues which should have never passed quality assurance. The bad single player and the quality and cheating issues make this the worst shooter of the past years. Expand
  17. Oct 24, 2012
    3
    tl;dr: Pass on this game, it is pathetic and if there were not an EA logo plastered all over the place, you might think it were a F2P indie game.

    Full Review: I was excited about this game, truly. I am an avid BF player and, until MW3, an avid CoD player. I play both games competitively and I am, without trying to sound too arrogant, a very good player. I played the original MoH, and I
    tl;dr: Pass on this game, it is pathetic and if there were not an EA logo plastered all over the place, you might think it were a F2P indie game.

    Full Review: I was excited about this game, truly. I am an avid BF player and, until MW3, an avid CoD player. I play both games competitively and I am, without trying to sound too arrogant, a very good player. I played the original MoH, and I marginally enjoyed it. The MP wasn't great, but it was manageable. I heard that this game was supposed to fix the problems of the previous game and be a great infantry shooter. Boy, was I told wrong. This game, being completely frank, is WORSE than MoH 2010, if you can consider that possible. The movement and aiming is sluggish, the menus are the most non-intuitive possible, the hit detection is atrocious, the damage is outlandish, and the overall gun play is probably the worst I have ever experienced in my 18 years of gaming.

    On the bright side, the campaign is decent. But if you are going to spend $60 for a campaign game, at least buy one that will last you more than 5 hours.
    Expand
  18. Oct 23, 2012
    3
    This is a very generic shooter the usage of the frostbite 2 engine is laughable. Nothing like bf3 as far as engine use. This is really just a console port in 1080p. Graphics are bad and textures are bland compared to bf3 which we was told it would look better. Also EA wouldn't release any review copies prior to release and that should tell you something the game is ok at best.
  19. DXR
    Oct 23, 2012
    3
    A refreshing change from bf3 but I gotta say the multiplayer leaves a bit to be desired for me. With the launch day bugs aside...the maps are very small with minimal cover and are very, very linear and bottlenecked. You are rarely able to vault on top of rocks, rubble, vehicles, etc to sneak up on the enemy or find a good hasty ambush spot. Plan on always standing on the ground. There isA refreshing change from bf3 but I gotta say the multiplayer leaves a bit to be desired for me. With the launch day bugs aside...the maps are very small with minimal cover and are very, very linear and bottlenecked. You are rarely able to vault on top of rocks, rubble, vehicles, etc to sneak up on the enemy or find a good hasty ambush spot. Plan on always standing on the ground. There is also no environment destruction whatsoever. Wood or chain link fence in your way? Gotta hoof around it. Sure no one is expecting big open maps but to get from point A to point B you almost always have to decide between one or two tunnels, hallways, or narrow pathways to run down. There isn't much openhandedness. The gameplay feels slow but rounds go by extremely fast. Unless you run into a group of bad guys and happen to blast them away don't count on getting anything more than the UAV before getting killed again as the UAV requires you to be out in the open to even launch a majority of the time. If you enjoy the recon class don't plan on any good sniper nests, mastering bullet drop mechanics (basically absent), or finding any places to see enemies long range. If you play on a normal server everyone may as well have an ESP hack. If you are even remotely in someone's line of site you get a big red dot over your head. The semi-auto rifles are fun and effective once you unlock them. Granted, MoH is more in line with the classic FPS format and Warfighter definitely holds true to the MoH franchise, I didn't see much innovation here. Nothing MW:2 didn't achieve a few years ago. In my opinion...older FPS games were better designed and thought out. Seems like they focused more on the stats, social network, and loadout system than they did map design and gameplay. I understand it is better than MoH 2010 but since it is right on the heels of BF3 and uses the Frostbite 2 engine we know what it is capable of and Warfighter certainly doesn't take advantage of it to its full extent. It sits right next to it on battlelog...so I expected it to be at least at the same level. At the very least maps along the lines of Close Quarters but they are even more limited and confined than those. Fire teams are a great feature. If you are paired up with a buddy or a good player you can do some real damage. If you're with a tard consider yourself solo! I'll keep playing. It is very fun, extremely easy, and very approachable. It just won't replace the depth of strategy, amazing environments, and diversity in gameplay that I find in BF3. Expand
  20. Oct 30, 2012
    3
    multiplayer critica...Bien....la verdad esperaba otra cosa de este juego. yo buscaba algo realista algo distinto (veía algo distinto algo prometedor mi debut con MHO fue una desilusión ) y parece que todos los juegos van a seguir la linea del call of duty ("juego que para mi es una reverenda MIERDA!!!"). y bueno esto viene de EA. "que puedo esperar de esta gente".....
    si te
    multiplayer critica...Bien....la verdad esperaba otra cosa de este juego. yo buscaba algo realista algo distinto (veía algo distinto algo prometedor mi debut con MHO fue una desilusión ) y parece que todos los juegos van a seguir la linea del call of duty ("juego que para mi es una reverenda MIERDA!!!"). y bueno esto viene de EA. "que puedo esperar de esta gente".....
    si te gusta la mierda del cod o el bf3 ni lo pienses, seguro que te va a gustar como la gran mayoría de la gilada.....si buscas algo realista algo distinto a lo q se viene jugando este no es tu juego... (es mas estoy pensando en vender mi cuenta de origin)
    voy a seguir jugando a mis juegos favoritos RO2, cs:go, dod:s ......
    Expand
  21. Oct 23, 2012
    3
    A generic shooter nothing more, if you are looking for something new dont buy this game. 6 hours campaign, extremely linear, hand holding game (treats you like a child). Mediocre at best.
  22. Oct 27, 2012
    3
    Many say this game is rushed but nothing such. This is what it really is. They are using Frostbite 2 which is in use on Battlefield 3, it is refined and graphically gorgeous, most of the job is already done by DICE, Danger Close have to take it tweak it a little, make a few multiplayer maps, throw in a mediocre campaign and their done. But they fail everywhere, even the engine is buggy andMany say this game is rushed but nothing such. This is what it really is. They are using Frostbite 2 which is in use on Battlefield 3, it is refined and graphically gorgeous, most of the job is already done by DICE, Danger Close have to take it tweak it a little, make a few multiplayer maps, throw in a mediocre campaign and their done. But they fail everywhere, even the engine is buggy and you have to wonder how considering DICE has ironed out most of it, just shows you how brilliant the team at Danger Close is, round of applause, while a talented studio like 38 Studios is out of business DC gets a second shot to make another shoddy game. Here is what is wrong with the game:
    - Maps are way too small, corners are tight and if a team is holding top point you are doomed as you will not get through, if you are getting shot you cannot take cover behind anything because there barely is anything, and you can't dart into a corner because most times the maps are linear and its forwards and backwards until you get the options to turn left or right, oh wait your dead.
    - Gameplay in general is like every other game, except this one feels a little more sluggish, probably because of the constant need of having to scope in to shoot, because hip fire is awful and your bullets are like bb pellets they do absolutely no damage so you can't miss any shot. Fireteam/Buddy seems pointless to because if you are playing with someone you don't know they will just go off on their own and I shouldn't be expected to follow them if they keep running into DEATH, also spawning on them is another issue, when they are seen by the enemy the timer shoots up to 4 seconds and everytime they are shot or spotted again it happens all the time. I recommend falling back all the time, you can get to them quicker like that. The lean feature is also dodgy with it forcing you to hold alt and direction meaning you cant actually move your character when leaning.
    All in all this game is terrible, a few changes are obviously coming through patches, better map through PAID DLC unfortunately, I know it sucks, those map can be even worse though. Your better off buying BF3 or any Call of Duty title ANY CALL OF DUTY IS BETTER THAN THIS. Battlefield 3 can offer close quarters with a better feeling, can give you mini maps from its giants and not suffer from it. Want an FPS? then this isn't it.
    One example of a bad map: Think the game mode was RUSH not sure what it is called here, but we had too fall back and we were forced to play in a small mansion, the cut off point of combat area was also ridiculous considering our enemies could spawn there and snipe all they liked without us getting close, it was literally the middle of the combat zone in logic, but DC decided to cut it off because their idiots, haven't they made a game before? Thanks for reading a little rushed, see this is probably what rushed looks like, but this game has mostly been in development for 2 years, it uses a brilliant engine, all it needs is a few drawings of maps and done but they failed. I would give the game to a different studio, not DICE they're busy making awesome.
    Expand
  23. Nov 10, 2012
    3
    Its a very disappointing game. For the story, it is not dramatic or exciting, you feel like your killing the npc`s in 1 shot , constantly switching back and forth between characters which made the single player worst, but the driving level was very good and by far the best part and most enjoyable thing in Medal of Honor Warfighter. As for the multi-player, it feels like your never hittingIts a very disappointing game. For the story, it is not dramatic or exciting, you feel like your killing the npc`s in 1 shot , constantly switching back and forth between characters which made the single player worst, but the driving level was very good and by far the best part and most enjoyable thing in Medal of Honor Warfighter. As for the multi-player, it feels like your never hitting the enemy, very slow paced, and when its not slow paced its fast paced and you start to die right when you spawn. I think this is because snipers seem so overpowered and can spawn kill and basically just kill anyone they want whenever they want which is hard to avoid. Even on indoor maps. Overall I was extremely excited to get this game and am very very disappointed with it. I have tried multi player multiple times and if I haven`t my rating would have been lower. There actually is a few pros about this game, the driving level is very fun and the maps, landscape and graphics are very pleasing and amaze me. Expand
  24. Nov 15, 2012
    3
    Quite disappointing on every aspect :
    - graphically, despite the game using Frostbite 2, it is not better than the 2010 UE3-driven MoH...
    - the solo is boring, it's a succession of corridors where you end up waiting for the enemies to come out of their covers to shoot them ; the car driving parts are fun in the beginning but rapidly become boring as well - the multiplayer part takes
    Quite disappointing on every aspect :
    - graphically, despite the game using Frostbite 2, it is not better than the 2010 UE3-driven MoH...
    - the solo is boring, it's a succession of corridors where you end up waiting for the enemies to come out of their covers to shoot them ; the car driving parts are fun in the beginning but rapidly become boring as well
    - the multiplayer part takes place on very small maps with poor level-design
    Expand
  25. Sep 30, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I was a huge fan of the MOH series when I played it on the original Xbox, I would defend this game if I had to... but I cant. In the single player mode, story line is poor. Sure it's based of "Real moments of war" but it does this to much! There's this sniper part of the first mission when instead of using the scope dead on sights, you have to align the scope to a different point of view, with no instructions! There's a car chase in the single player and its floaty as it ever been before, you often crash yourself and lose your target. Than there's this "Bust In" scenes witch are heavily scripted, but would have been fun... but instead they made it buggy and often if you don't kill the enemies when you flashed banged them in a certain amount of time, you will die. The graphics are good, but not as good as BF3, which is shocking because MOH: Warfighter is made from Frostbite 2 engine. The multiplayer is fun and addicting... but buggy, laggy, and annoying at times. You have to play with a random selected partner once you enter in the game, and if your doing good out there, while your other guy is doing bad, you will often, be in 5th place while the other team who help each other will win the squad battle. More importantly, the multiplayer does nothing interesting at all, its barebones and can get boring after a while. Often you will connect to games to be disconnected and not go back to the multiplayer screen, but to the main title screen where you have to go back to the multiplayer screen while waiting the Origins servers to load again. And here's the worst part: DLC is out of control. If you don't have enough DLC, it will never get you in a game, until you pay for all the DLC. Its just... its just stupid! Sure the last MOH game was OK but not this game. Bottom line, its Single Player is mine numbing, Multiplayer is barebones, buggy, missing tutorials, and is missing a lot of things that the developers promised. Sure the graphics are good but this is painful. which is why I give this a 3/10. This is the worst MOH game up to date... the beta test of the game was 10x better than this game. Hopefully, Danger Close will learn these mistakes and make there Next-Gen MOH game better! Expand
  26. Jun 24, 2014
    3
    **** this game. When you're not spawning directly in the line of fire of a sniper or LMG, you're dying to another enemy setup already to your flank. It doesn't let you strafe left/right, and most of the defense maps allow the attacking team to just spawn snipers and sit back and camp. No wonder this game flopped so bad, it pales in comparison to BF3 and COD. DO NOT BUY!
  27. Nov 4, 2012
    2
    This game is a load of garbage, buggy as hell, laggy as hell, unbalanced as hell, cluttered as hell and unoriginal as hell..What the hell was happening in Danger Close's mind eh? This game just ruins the MoH franchise..The single player? What the hell is that?
  28. Oct 26, 2012
    2
    What a disappointment, I really have nothing good to say. I like the graphics and the sounds but thats it. The story is boring and repetitive. Seems like all the maps are based on each other, they are all boring too. If you played the MoH from 2010, you know what I mean. There is really nothing good about this game. MoH has gone in the CoD direction but with a little more realism andWhat a disappointment, I really have nothing good to say. I like the graphics and the sounds but thats it. The story is boring and repetitive. Seems like all the maps are based on each other, they are all boring too. If you played the MoH from 2010, you know what I mean. There is really nothing good about this game. MoH has gone in the CoD direction but with a little more realism and better looks. Still, a polished turd is a turd. Expand
  29. Oct 26, 2012
    2
    Same generic shooter we game every couple months. It Doesn't change anything, linear campaign and awe-full gameplay. Using the Frosbite 2 engine isn't making any better. It's like taking Battlefield 3 and creating a different story line. Very disappointed of what I got. I really liked the MoH 2010 and this? not even half of it.
  30. Oct 28, 2012
    2
    Poor game, this game was obvious rushed, but they had time to create the next map pack, the game is full of bugs and unbalanced weapons if your thinking of buying this game DON'T!, they're not going to fix this piece of junk, you cal also tell they let console idiots beta test this game because the amount of issues it has.
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]