I just bought the game for $20, and having completed the campaign and acquired over 1000 kills in online multiplayer, I'm convinced something is afoot. This game is far from mediocre, it's actually pretty damn good.
The single-player encompasses all the eye-roll worthy tropes CoD does, unfortunately, yet it does so with a semblance of authenticity, bringing a bit of spice to what remains a somewhat mundane affair. The guns, however, have recoil. The shooting feels weighty and satisfying, and the game, while short, packs in an impressive variety of environments and tasks that manage to keep the game lively. Even the AI is quite impressive (seriously). The enemies are hard to predict, and the funny thing is, I've read reviews passing off this very fact as poor AI. Some bum-rush you with shotguns and take you by surprise, some flank, some take potshots from afar, and most annoyingly, some sit, cowering behind cover until you've killed seemingly everyone, and then start unloading on you from behind when you pass their position. At first I was convinced this was a glitch or poor programming, but having witnessed it multiple times in addition to the other tactics employed by the enemy, I'm convinced it's an intentional tactic.
The single-player however, as merely passable as it is, takes the backseat to the incredibly fun multiplayer. I suppose if you consider the fact that you shoot guns in a modern military setting, you could call this derivative just as you could call any modern shooter derivative -- however, the game actually offers quite a bit of orginality that's rarely been touched on at all. The buddy system is surprisingly well done, and eliminates many of the bad spawning woes that plague games like these. Healing and resupplying on your buddy after a tense hunkering down against armed forces generates a sense of cameraderie absent from many games, save for Battlefield -- though there the maps are so large, that if you're not communicating with your mates, it's likely you'll never even bump into one. In Warfighter, buddying up is pretty much a requirement if you plan on winning -- and it's awesome when you do and you and your teammate are shown brandishing your badassitude as the top firesquad.
The buddy system is only one unique feature though, and it's the one you most likely know about. The class system, which barely any reviews have touched upon, is extremely interesting, and adds both depth and surprising balance. Think Team Fortress meets CoD. Each class has a special ability that would be totally overpowered in most cases, yet, here, where other classes can easily counter your abilities, a meta game of rock-paper-scissors ensues, and it's a blast. Load up a magazine of match ammunition as the point man to quickly take out that heavily armored Demolitions man, or lay down your bipod after hearing a Spec Ops use his heat vision, and mow him down as he comes running around the corner, right in your forward mounted radar's line of site. All of these things combine to create something fresh, not derivative. The last game in the series was derivative, but the new features encompassed here are the antithesis of the word. They're fun, and the opposite of almost everything the reviews claim are wrong with the game.
So what gives, why the hate for MoH: Warfighter? It's arguably better designed than the 8.5'd MW3, and nowhere close to being 2.5 points behind it.
Log in to comment