I seriously hope this does not turn into another Morrowind vs Oblivion debate. We have yet to see any gameplay footage (including what engine it uses). Personally, I am really excited after seeing the trailer, hope the modding tools are just as good as before if not better.

I am in Canada and it still saids $39.95. Weird

I don't care if it gets a 9, it still doesn't change the fact Gamespot reviewers are lazy and they shouldn't do a slack job where they just copy and paste from the console reviews. A PC review should pertain to the PC version of the game and address the issues on PC, or explain the advantages of playing on PC.

The logic doesn't make sense if you say just because YOU enjoyed Black Ops more than others, it deserves the $60 price tag and people should buy it. For you personally you may think it's worth it, but if I am on neutral ground having to decide between a $20 TF2 and a $60 COD Black Ops, I would definitely lean towards TF2 even without knowing what the game is like. I am just saying that because MW2 was such a big flop (IMO and to most PC gamers), what warrants me to buy another COD with a $60 price tag? Honestly I don't know what the game is like, but just from looking at it I have no interest, especially after hearing all the performance issues.

Also, I really don't like the direction companies are pushing the price of games by making them $10 more than before. You can argue all you want about how buying food for a day will cost just as much, but what makes me want to accept this new "standard" when games offer less these days (Getting rid of good long manuals, artbooks, game boxes?)

I want to play my New Vegas, but this total conversion just keeps dragging me back! You have to try it! The only flaws I can find with this mod is that there are performance issues, especially for lower end computers (it's not the most optimised). But considering the sheer scale of this mod, I can look past it

Amazon is currently having this promotion where you can buy two games and get the third for equal or less value (includes most gaming consoles too)

http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html/ref=br_lf_m_1000626371_pglink_2?ie=UTF8&plgroup=8&docId=1000626371&plpage=2

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

I honestly don't know why Bethesda gets a free pass on buggy games yet other games are penalized for it.

Ragingbear505

not a fanboy, but I do not think they did...they got a 7.5 when they would have gotten a 9.0 easily

Hmmm I have not gotten New Vegas yet so I will say nothing good/bad about it. However, the reason I believe New Vegas is getting lower scores is because it really feels more of an "expansion" so to say, since it is still based on the old Gamebryo engine and has very similar mechanics to Fallout 3. All I hear from people is that New Vegas has deeper story, improved dialogue and ties to the origins, but I seriously think Obsidian just learned from Fallout 3's shortcomings and added many tweaks. They didn't change the formula, or innovate anything. I guess it is an "improved" Fallout 3, or even a true sequel to the original Fallouts, but I still feel like they should've went for something new. People here on Gamespot judge Fallout 3 harshly, but it was more "novel" for it's time, unlike this game, where the formula seems to be tiring itself.

Well, it is my experiance that is far more simplistic and generic than mw2, even in story. Important elements like characters and plot twists dont make any appereances here. As for fps nowadays?

I would dare add borderlands and fallout 3 but those are rpgs. I guess there is crysis and a little bit far cry 2. It is sad that singleplayer fps are so simplistic nowadays.

If they could make a a game in modern warfare with big maps, nonlinear objectives, vehicles, upgrades and all those things in a singleplayer experiance, things will be diffirent.

The saddest thing is that both doom and duke nukem that came around 1996 were far more complex and nonlinear than the current games with more items/features to play with. Yet the new dukenukem games keeps the mature humor but gets simplistc gameplay with heatlh regen and 2 weapons limit with no items.

I have come to believe that gamedevelopers make games nowadays on the fly just for the money rather making them deep and interesting.

dakan45

I really don't get where you're coming from dakan45. I would definitely agree this game is a huge flop and a big finger to the original Medal of Honor of games, but seriously why do you have to compare things so drastically to COD MW2? Isn't this thread about discussion on the review of the game, it's faults and its merits, not another COD/BC2 flame war? Although I can see how people really wanted this to be the MW2, but instead it failed hard

I've played most of the Medal of Honor games (at least the ones on PC), and I must say Allied Assault and Frontlines were games that I enjoyed much more than COD and even Battlefield. Medal of Honor seems to evoke more emotions in the game and make you feel respect for the veterans and heroes.

I do not mind the setting of the new Medal of Honor, yet it just doesn't seem to be what the series is really about (same with Airborne). I mean just listen to this old soundtrack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqO4wHrP1HA and you will know what I mean.

As long as EA can pull off this one, I think all the controversy around Taliban in the game will be gone in no time as long as the game really show what it's really like to be a special ops soldier in Afghanistan

Most ATI cards are less expensive than Nvidia. That's why I choose it