Medal of Honor Review (5/10)

The FPS war of 2010 is on. Halo: Reach laid down the playing cards last month, garnering a spectacular 10/10 as one of the best instalments in the Xbox-exclusive sci-fi franchise, and renowned contenders Medal of Honor and Call Of Duty are also looking to vie for crown of best shooter this winter. The former has finally hit shelves despite controversy of its Afghanistan conflict storyline threatening a worldwide ban. Whether a ban would have been for the better, however, is in my mind up to debate: despite all its efforts to prove itself as a top FPS, Medal of Honor fails in every respect, and proves to be one of the biggest disappoints of this year. They say its what is on the inside that counts, but damn, if MoH isn't ugly then this reviewer doesn't know what is. Stairs are blocky, browns and reds on handrailings seem to merge into one disjointed blot, nearby and distant buildings couldn't be told as war-ravaged ones if they were placed in the latest FIFA, and even the vehicles look fairly sub-par. This general lack of effort by EA and Danger Close in the visual department left me feeling sour of MoH from the start, but a hideously slow frame-rate and gameplay which simply copies most aspects of last year's Modern Warfare 2 (10/10) simply added to the wealth of problems on hand. To its credit, Medal of Honor does make a valiant effort to respect our troops currently fighting on the battlefield, and never portrays the Taliban as completely evil. Also, DICE's multi-player has evolved pleasantly from Battlefield: Bad Company 2, though doesn't eclipse that title or COD 6, making overall for a failed revamp of a long-dead franchise that perhaps deserves a permanent rest. In other words...wait for Black Ops.