It builds empathy, not through CoD‘s broad emotional manipulations of nuclear explosions or strained objections to lives being lost, but with dust and stacking drama and the claustrophobic embrace of being utterly outnumbered. Forget about CoD‘s insistence on switching geographical areas and leather-faced protagonists with each level here’s you’re stuck as the same guy in the same situation and the resulting pressure is transformative. What’s absolutely vital to note here – and an element that further underlines the second half as standalone story – is that, from this point, it’s a clear unbroken timeline to the final shot of the game. The preceding shooting galleries filled with aggressive generic Talibanic enemies have been good training for what awaits you surrounded and fired on from all sides, it’s the first sign of the intensity and desperation that grows with each new area. However, the second part of the narrative – and what I now consider to be the true start of the game, forcing all that came before into a kind of extended prologue – starts with a hard touchdown for a squad of American marines entering the fray in a whirling, spitting helicopter.
It’s nothing you haven’t seen before, usually done with a greater degree of success elsewhere. Slo-mo shootouts in dusky market villages turret gunning through hordes of cannon fodder requisite stealth missions to locate and tag enemy assets. Which is just as well, because on first play, it doesn’t seem like anything more than a reflection of CoD‘s formulaic structure. It’s a story of two distinct halves, the latter making retrospective sense of the former. The ability to hammer through the campaign in a few play sessions really benefits the plot. Granted, these elements are largely held as negative traits in today’s open-world, pro-agency gaming market, but what it does allow Medal Of Honor to do is take on the feel of a short modern war movie, albeit one that has occasional fail states. Two of its main criticisms turn out to be its main strengths – its steadfast linearity, and relatively short run time. However, when taken as its own game and not one that is trying to ape another, it suddenly reveals itself in a new light, and doesn’t just match the CoD intensity but actually goes some way to surpass it. When compared to the slick and choreographed Call Of Duty behemoth, Medal Of Honor just couldn’t stand up to the expectations that had been laid out by EA.
#MEDAL OF HONOR 2010 REVIEW PS3#
Beyond some shaky technical issues (especially with the PS3 version, at a time when system parity was a difficult endeavour), many reviewers called out the overbearing stoicism of the short single-player campaign and uneventful multiplayer. So it was almost understandable when the negative reviews started flooding in. The marketing made direct parallels and there was no doubt that Medal Of Honor was clearly attempting to fight the same battle. EA obviously wanted a slice of Activision’s FPS pie, so they formed developer Danger Close and instructed it to do one thing: create a CoD-beater that could fold into an annual franchise. Call Of Duty, remember, was doing everything right at this point (something that would definitely not continue), with the 2010 variant Black Ops poised to become one of the biggest selling games of all time. Using the goodwill attached to the fantastic PS1 titles that allowed the player to barrel through the streets of WW2 France, the franchise was re-adjusted to fit modern-day requirements: bombastic single-player campaign, engrossing multiplayer modes, and a publicised focus on being “authentic” and “respectful” to the real heroes of the various modern-day US wars. Medal Of Honor was EA’s attempt to really upset the Call Of Duty applecart. This can create a tidal wave of negativity for any game that falls into such a trap. Reviewers balance expectation against result, gorging on the game to complete it within the review window, and often a marketing agenda will shape these initial expectations in order to compete with a rival publisher’s title. This then bleeds outwards into review culture: scan for bulletpoints, scroll to the score, and allow our own personal opinion to be instantly coloured by that of another. Every single human being on the planet perceives things differently, yet some choose to write this perception as if it were fact. There’s always been a problem when writing reviews: by their very nature, they’re unable to be objective. Focus On Design is a spotlight on the mechanics and structure of a chosen game and as such is filled with spoilers.
0 kommentar(er)
