Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.


Don't Prox Me Bro


Posts: 581

Date of registration
: Sep 4th 2012

Platform: PC


Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message


Tuesday, November 6th 2012, 4:25pm

It can be argued that it is a clone of everything else in an over saturated market and otherwise lacklustre and underwhelming. 4/10. Maybe. Maybe not. But there is something wrong.

I think this is far more frightening than people make it out to be. Name another military shooter in the past 5 years that has gotten the time of day that isn't Battlefield or Call of Duty? Arma? Comparatively a miniscule number playing.

With DICE doing everything Battlefield and Activision down to basically Treyarch and whoever they can force to do a copy paste on MW and call them Infinity Ward, we have 2 or 3 studios at most making games in this genre that people agree are up to standards.

That is unless you include free to play, which I don't because it is a completely different game when you make it F2P.

So this market is flooded by....everybody else or COD and Battlefield. We are at the point of effectively duopoly here. Maybe that isn't such a bad thing, but maybe it shows that this genre takes so much money to develop and has such finnicky whiny fans that there is no hope for someone without amazing fan loyalty and a much loved formula. Not saying that MOH deserves to be a break out hit, but the quality misses on release and the community reaction to those quality misses makes me worry that we will basically never see a non-COD or non-Battlefield succeed in this genre because it is just not possible with the cost of developing high quality military FPS games.

  • "Requisix" started this thread

Posts: 1,218

Date of registration
: Apr 27th 2012

Platform: PS3


Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message


Tuesday, November 6th 2012, 5:17pm

Well then there is your answer. If it does not have any staying power there is something wrong. Might not be 4/10 wrong but there is something wrong.

What is it of your business if there is 'something wrong'?

There probably is something wrong. Like someone else stated, the release date could've been different to maximise sales. But just because there is 'something wrong' with the game and it isn't as good as it should be - in your opinion - then so? Is that a reason to give a shitty review?

By 'shitty review', by the way, I don't mean the a shitty rating. I mean a shitty review.
No. My view was that if the game can not hold its own against everything else that is out there than it is either a clone of everything that is out there or otherwise not unique enough to capture a lasting fan base. Since this seams to be what is happening then there is something "wrong'. It can be argued that it is a clone of everything else in an over saturated market and otherwise lacklustre and underwhelming. 4/10. Maybe. Maybe not. But there is something wrong.

You expected MoH to 'hold its own' against BF3 and CoD, and just because it didn't do that, you're implying that the game is almost worthless because it has 'something wrong'? Oh please, please, please.

Everyone knew that BF3 and CoD would still reign. That's common knowledge, and one of the reasons why this is true it because such a large percentage of players are reluctant to switch up their playstyle, and therefore switch games (this is mainly CoD but as you can see with the sheer amount of BF3 comparison in this thread, the same thing goes on where BF3 players don't fully consider MoH as it's own 'style' of FPS).

There isn't something wrong just because the game doesn't compete with BF3 or CoD. Yes, there is something wrong in that the game is (apparently) full of bugs and glitches, and yes, there is something wrong that it's quite 'unpolished', and yes, the cluttered interface may be an issue. But is there something wrong in the sense that the game can't compete with two of the most successful FPS franchises? No, not by a long shot.

I expected something more sensible to come from you, Dice.


50 Shades of Dice


Posts: 3,071

Date of registration
: Dec 12th 2011

Platform: PC

Location: Sol.


Reputation modifier: 11

  • Send private message


Thursday, November 15th 2012, 2:46pm

I was not implying it was worthless. I never once said I had strong views on the score. What I am saying is that the game is not as strong as other titles. Nothing more. Nothing less. Now for a game so hyped this is disappointing.

On short the games needed something revolutionary to not just be another COD clone. It offered nothing. You can make the claim that HALO 4 is now borderline a cod clone and in a way you would be right. But the feel of the game is different. Nothing about warfighter made me feel it was really unique.

Now you can defend the game. You can hate the game. I don't care. Scores font mean a whole lot. N4S got great scores. I was not won over. Fall of Liberty got panned. I liked it. If you like the game then play it. Scores tell half a story. But in the world of Modern shooters MOH in my mind offers nothing new. In the current climate that is a fatal mistake.