Originally Posted by bd2003
The impression I'm getting from the hour I played and the reviews is that they basically tried to bring books like "no easy day" (the bin laden raid) and "american sniper" to life. It didnt seem very bro to me at all. Its a solid concept to work with, it's too bad they didn't let it cook for another few months so they could do it right.
I see that for single player. I just dont think they had a chance. If the date slid everyone would have balked and said its junk. They did a beta and patched a bunch of things and still got slammed for it
From some research I guess MOH 2010 barely sold over the limit to do a sequel. So this one almost didn't happen. Looks like BF got the major dollars and MOH was kept short but on a deadline. Its too bad EA didn't pony up more dough and staff. That or Danger Close isn't good at managing resources.
The SP on this isn't the best but its the single biggest knock on the game. Reviewers seem to gloss over the multi. MW3 had what I thought was unacceptablely crappy AI and a flat to the point of boring campaign, but 9.5 it is with little regard to the campaign.
I dont see how the reviewers dont have fun in some fashion playing this game. I kind of think they want it done and gone because their review copy of Halo or BLOPS is on the way or there. Maybe this game is pure garbage like they say and I'm delusional but it's a fun delusion!