Medal of Honor Series Comes to an End

[Sonic 296]

After the failure that was Warfighter, it looks like rebirth of the Medal of Honor franchise has come to an end. It has been officially "canned"....

 

Due to a poor critical reception and low sales of Warfighter, the Medal of Honor series will no longer be released every two years as planned, EA has announced.

 

"We struggled with two challenges: the slowdown that impacted the entire sector and poor critical and commercial reception for Medal of Honor Warfighter," said EA chief operating officer Peter Moore in an investor call today.

 

"Medal of Honor was an obvious miss. The game was solid, but the focus on combat authenticity did not resonate with consumers.”

"Critics were polarised and gave the game scores which were, frankly, lower than it deserved," he said.

 

Released last October, Warfighter was the second Medal of Honor title to be set in the present day. It has a Metacritic rating of 55 on PlayStation and PC, and 53 on Xbox 360. Gameplanet gave it 4.0.

"This one is behind us now. We are taking Medal of Honor out of the rotation, and have a plan to bring year-over-year continuity to our shooter offerings," said Moore.

 

EA Labels president Frank Gibeau said that the company took responsibility for not producing a big-seller.

 

“We’re a hit-driven business where it’s about what you can build in a certain period of time and really deliver for the marketplace, and frankly we missed on Medal of Honor.”

EA’s other big FPS, Battlefield 3, has amassed nearly 3 million Premium subscribers since it launched last May.

 

I'll probably still buy a copy of Warfighter when I see it for about $20. But its shame this happened. Medal of Honor (2010) was actually rather good so the expectations were higher for Warfighter. Very disappointing.

 

http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/xbox-360/news/1021301.20130131.Medal-of-Honor-series-canned/

 

 

 

[PurpleGaga27 40]

Sad to see this end. The Medal of Honor series started to fall since the beginning of Call of Duty.

[Luk3us 63]

The game was just a bad COD clone, and why should you waste money on a clone, when you can buy the real thing?

[Traymen 6]

@Luk3us

COD is sooooo original, that i can puke on myself... and i can do this for free without payin' 7th time 50$ for same game... again.

[Luk3us 63]

But you have to admit someone else's puke always tastes better than your own.

[Doctor Destiny 41]

Bummer.

[Gben 20]

But you have to admit someone else's puke always tastes better than your own.

 

I can't personally say Luk3us...

[lkRaven 0]

I think they are making way for the new respawn game (remember the original COD4 guys) .

 

I agree with Sonic MoH reboot was pretty good and I loved its MP as well. Never got Warfighter cos my Rig does not cope well with Frostbite . I might get it for the campaing if I find it dirt cheap someday.

[Traymen 6]

I wonder why EA didn't used the Korean or Vietnamese theater of war. Why they followed Activision in their "modern" war scenario, while there are very immersive conflicts - even those which i have mentioned before. I believe i will never get an answer...

Edited February 20, 2013 by Traymen

[Doctor Destiny 41]

Agreed. I'd love to see a proper Korean War or Vietnam War FPS.

[Saracen 16]

The Battlefield Franchise has technically already done Vietnam... I can't see EA wanting to visit that again until they've exhausted all other possible events, time era's etc.. After all if Black Ops 2 is anything to go by, everyone's done the modern military shooter to death and has suddenly moved on to Tom Clancy inspired near future military shooters...

 

I'm sure we'll get around to Battlefield 0AD eventually and we'll all start firing bows and arrows at each other. Ironically this does seem to be the weapon of choice since Far Cry 3 and Crysis 3 have used it. Surely that's another bandwagon that'll be done to death.

 

To be honest though, there really wasn't room for 2 highly respected military shooters in the EA line-up. MoH was always eventually going to lose out to Battlefield.

[Sonic 296]

From what I was told at EALA back December 2012, EA's plan was to have Battlefield and Medal of Honor live side by side, with a new release alternating each year. Warfighter in 2012, BF4 in 2013, another MoH in 2014 and so on. This was because there was a CoD every damn year.

[Saracen 16]

Perhaps, but CoD has become its own worst enemy by doing yearly updates. There's no need to compete directly as Battlefield 3 still has legs, and is a much better quality online shooter.

 

I don't think personally it was just Warfighter's fault (although there was a lot wrong with it). A lot of people have had experiences where playing the same thing over and over gets awfully tiresome. Eventually fatigue sets in, even if there is a huge social aspect of playing with friends over VOIP.

 

It's better for a company to just release a good solid quality title in a franchise that changes more dramatically over 2 or 3 years rather than just slightly every year. That said I think EA are making the wrong move releasing Battlefield 4 so soon. BF3 still has some great legs to it online, and is still a lot more refreshing than any yearly CoD ever will be.

 

I would have preferred Bad Company 3 because the campaign in those games is a lot more enjoyable. Bad company is a fuller, more well rounded package, with 4 good solid characters, good humour and a strong enough story to keep you interested. The campaign length is usually twice as long as CoD's is as well... But standard Battlefield itself is, and always will be multiplayer only.