|System: PC, PS3, Xbox 360*|
|Dev: Danger Close|
|Pub: Electronic Arts|
|Release: October 23, 2012|
|Screen Resolution: 480p-1080p||Blood, Intense Violence, Strong Language|
I tried restarting from the most recent checkpoint and turning off the console to no avail. Eventually, I had to restart the mission, which worked. At least when multiplayer broke it was more blatant about it.
In multiplayer, I had an incident in which, while spawning from a Blackhawk, I got caught in level geometry and couldn't move for about twenty seconds. I also had at least one blatant crash to a totally black screen following a match. These would be forgivable if the multiplayer were well-balanced and compelling, but Medal of Honor: Warfighter quickly betrayed one of the sad truths about online gaming: team-focused games don't work well if no one is talking to you.
Multiplayer in Medal of Honor is predicated around the "Fireteam" mechanic, which buddies up players in groups of two. In the single-player, this is more or less limited to one using one's squadmates as walking ammo stations; at any time, they can completely refill your primary gun's ammunition. In multiplayer, though, not only can you refill your teammate's ammo, but you can heal him, spawn on him if he's not in combat, even see where enemies are before you actually see them, if your partner has spotted them. Without communication, though, this is often fairly pointless. Your mute team will be utterly dominated by your opponents.
I think that, in Battlefield 3, the size of each map, coupled with the number of players on it, ensures a certain degree of enjoyment. There are vehicles to be piloted or driven and there's just so much going on that it's easy to be entertained even if one's team isn't doing well. Warfighter, though, is a more intimate game, and the team elements aren't encouraged strongly enough to make the average player invoke them (I'm not even sure the game does much to make them aware of the possibilities thereof).
Medal of Honor: Warfighter feels unpolished. It's a slew of great ideas mashed together in a way that doesn't give any of them time to truly shine, rushed out to make a deadline that didn't do it any favors. While there's enjoyment to be had here, it is fleeting and often devolves rapidly into frustration and boredom. I feel bad saying that, because the folks at Danger Close seemed intensely passionate about their work and there's simply so much potential in here, but it clearly needed more time if it was to develop into anything truly unique and compelling. Instead, it seems as though a bunch of good-to-excellent parts were put together and the result is significantly less than one would expect their sum to be.
Date: October 24, 2012