You think that having massive thirty-two player multiplayer Infrastructure battles would give
Medal of Honor Heroes higher marks, but critics these days... they're hard to appease. While the game isn't poorly reviewed by any means, it hasn't been glowingly reviewed, either. Maybe WWII games are becoming a bit too stale and familiar? Maybe the analog nub wore out the critics? Let's find out:
- IGN (84/100) loved the game enough to ignore most of its flaws: "Heroes has set a new standard for portable first-person shooters. It has a number of issues, a few of which can irritate quite a bit, but when put into perspective they all seem rather small. It says a lot about a game when its highpoints do a great job of excusing, maybe even hiding its blemishes."
- Gamespot (73/100) hopes you like playing online: "If it had more depth, Medal of Honor Heroes would be a great game. No matter how you shake it, with a single-player story that's just four hours long, the game's over far too quickly."
- Game Informer (64/100) thinks we've killed enough Nazis: "Everything about Heroes feels like a rehash of old concepts, even if this is effectively a new game. As a full-on PSP FPS that manages to work and control moderately well, that may be enough to satisfy some players. The rest of us, meanwhile, are going to feel like we've seen this game a hundred times before, and not only are we ready for something new, but we've played that something new in the form of other, better titles."
It does seem like EA has crafted quite a technical achievement with
Heroes, especially in multiplayer. But I agree with Game Informer: I'm done with WWII shooters. And players that skip out of the multiplayer experience will certainly feel burned by such a short single-player campaign. But, it looks like anyone looking for some solid FPS multiplayer action on the PSP will have to look no further. The game is
now available in stores.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
10-26-2006 @ 11:31PM
Ladsaber said...
Well gameinformer can suck my balls then,they give Gangs of london a good score so it seems that guy hated his life,but really does someone rely on game informer?,is a 3rd class web site at is best.
Let me explain,i have a list of game sites that people regulary use or have some knowledge about.So here goes a small description:
Gamespot-Buyed by Nintendo and/or probably more people.Their Under rating is known all over the web but if you have a critical point of view you can maybe agree on some of their commentaries and everything would be fine,except that all their final notes want to say crap for some reason even if the score is good,great or superb.Yet all their previews suck,someway they manage to have less information on their previews than the picture of the game box itself.
Ign-Just dont trust their movies reviews.Also forget math since ign averages doesnt make any sence.For example ten 7.5`s suddenly form a 85/100 grade.
PSPfanboy never does reviews,which i will probably read.and maybe agree.
Gameinformer-One piece of the pile of shit the internet has to offer,directed by losers for the losers that relie on them.It existance is only known by those that seek them or people that click on links way too much
Since people really don’t care about this site only the people that have poor confidence on what they just bought read their reviews since no one use it as a guide to buy a game.
Also many people relie more on official sources, unofficial magazines and players more than this piece of crap called web site.
Gamesradar-Game informer but 10 times the crap and the smell.
Gamtrailers-Do yourself a favor,stick with just the trailers.
Play Magazine-A magazine known for is crappy reviews previews,hands-on.Well everything on the mag is crap,is not even good as toilet paper.
1up-If you like cheap sarcasm,jokes that are less than funny ,butt pranks,free nut jokes and bad puns you found yourself a good site since they suck on everything else.
Gamepro-"Welcome to Last Month",their reviews are never on time and are more than weird.Did I mention this site can also be bribed?.Gamepro is the only site that gave Super DBZ a 10.I know they aren’t made out of stone but try to disguise it at least.
Edge magazine-See Gameinformer description.It can be founded also in the "Welcome to Last Month” category.
Gamezone-The site feels so cheap you can hardly call it a source.Nice reviews,sorta.
Well I have more but just to end your suffering I will just add this
If you don’t like WWII games why the hell are you even looking at this game?.No one forcing you to buy it but I have to say you will be missing a lot of Online Fun.D-Match FTW!.
By the way I expect NDS retards and regular morons so…Nintendo Does Suck Live fans your handheld is the suck,your games are the suck and they will suck 4ever.To the morons all this is a huge joke statement but some parts are true,so before replying remember what grandma always sez:
If you have nothing nice to say…Just Shut the F*uck Up.
Reply
10-27-2006 @ 10:02AM
Player1 said...
Reviewers complain that PSP games aren't "pick up and play", and someone makes a game that has the portable nature of the system in mind, and they complain that it's too short. The online play is awesome in this game, and the fact that you can join or quit a server at any time is great. I'm loving this game, and it's got none of the connection problems Syphon Filter had. As a matter of fact just talking about it makes me want to go play.
Reply
10-27-2006 @ 2:57PM
carterman said...
I'm guessing they didn't try out the online. 32 player deathmatch with user-runnable servers is stuff that 99% of online console games don't have. And it works great too, all it really needs is voice chat to be perfect, really.
Reply