Medal of Honor “didn’t meet our quality expectations,” says EA executive

EA executive disappointed with MoH reviews, but maintains that the shooter was a successful reboot

Words: GamesRadarTylerNagata on November 3, 2010

If you thought that the Medal of Honor reboot could have been better, you’re not alone. Speaking to Eurogamer, EA executive Patrick Soderlund admitted that the shooter didn’t meet quality expectations. “What I can say is the game didn’t meet our quality expectations. In order to be successful in that space, we’re going to have to have a game that is really, really strong,” said Soderlund.

Soderulund also expressed some disappointment with review scores for Medal of Honor. “Medal of Honor is to some extent judged harsher than it should be. The game is better than today’s reviews are indicating,” said Soderlund.

Soderlund wasn’t willing to discuss specifics when questions about sales figures for Medal of Honor were raised, but considers the reboot a success. “I’m not at all saying Medal of Honor is a failure. It is a successful reboot of that franchise. We’re going to be strong in the future.”

Medal of Honor currently has a 75/100 average score on Metacritic. GamesRadar gave Medal of Honor’s singleplayer campaign a 7/10 and its multiplayer an 8/10 in our super review.

Nov 3, 2010

Source: Eurogamer

Medal of Honor super review
Danger close to greatness, but off by a hair

Free and paid Medal of Honor DLC coming November 2
Two new modes, four redesigned maps, and four brand new maps announced

Medal of Honor ad accidentally threatens innocent baby with gun
Internet creates its own game-related blooper

Platforms:

Xbox 360, PS3, PC

23 comments

View as:
Newest first
Oldest first

SAUGAPRIME - November 5, 2010 6:39 p.m.

This game would of been perfect if you would of had the guns in the story mode in the multiplayer and the duct and cover system in the mltiplayer, plus the game should of had more maps for the price you charged. And why are you making DICE put there finger in everybodies food? I see dice put there hand in N4S hot persuit why? criterion games made car games there hole lives, they don't need any help and I think dice didn't put there full effort in MOH cuz BFBC2 vietnam pack is out soon and they want there baby to stay number one shooter for EA I got news for you, crysis 2 is around the corner.
- Reply
- Report
DanAmrich - November 4, 2010 5:49 p.m.

7 and 8 out of 10 are not bad scores.
- Reply
- Report
Balaska - November 4, 2010 5:42 p.m.

I really enjoyed the new MoH, it somehow felt right, which MW2 didn't.
- Reply
- Report
Shamanoid - November 4, 2010 4:30 p.m.

They deserve it. After the success of the Modern Warfare franshise, Medal of honor team completely forgot about their franchise and wanted to mimic Modern Warfare. Completely forgetting about what Medal of Honor is...i miss the MoH i played on my playstation 2.
- Reply
- Report
tacehtselrahc - November 4, 2010 11:54 a.m.

I think MOH is a very good game, the campaign is much better than MW2's which was just a collection of multiplayer maps linked together by an idiotic storyline. I've read 'Not a good day to die' by Sean Naylor which is a detailed account of the battle for the Shahikot valley in 2002 and many of the events in MOH are in the book.
- Reply
- Report
ChainsawHero - November 4, 2010 5:23 a.m.

Campaign killed it for me, I installed the game on my xbox and still had freezes and non responsive NPC's that would cause me to reset back to a checkpoint or the entie level. Multiplayer was decent though.
- Reply
- Report
Inthedistrict - November 4, 2010 4:12 a.m.

I didn't think the game was that bad, honestly. It wasn't great, but it wasn't terrible. I have to agree with some of the other comments above though about rushing these games. If you don't think the game's up to snuff, why ship it out? Obviously, we don't want another Operation Flashpoint Dragon Rising situation to occur, but holding out 3 more months to get out some kinks might save your credibility when you have to go up to the podium and explain how the game didn't meet your expectations after release. BTW, it would have been nice to hear that BEFORE I purchased the game...
- Reply
- Report
NightCrawler_358 - November 4, 2010 3:28 a.m.

multiplayer was cool, cause its just like every DICE game, but the campaign was just some HOO-RAH propaganda. i finished the campaign in one sitting, and didn't even know or care about the story, and i love video game stories.
- Reply
- Report
TruckThunders - November 4, 2010 3:18 a.m.

EA, you didn't meet expectations because you were trying to take the fanbase of CoD. I don't care for CoD so I definitely don't care about this game. Make something more original and I might care.
- Reply
- Report
wind869 - November 4, 2010 2:39 a.m.

yeah the gamesradar review give it a too high of a score. the single player was at best a 6/10 and the multiplayer a 6.5/10, all it was lower grade version of battlefield (which means snipers are over power). Why wasn't there any good tanks, RV, or a damn helicopter, this was suppose to be the game that brings back "Medal of Honor" from a one game shooter, this game just a slap to the face all those who serve in the arm forces.
- Reply
- Report
DragYou - November 4, 2010 2:34 a.m.

I don't trust critics. I take my opinion and my opinion only. So in other words, pennies aren't funny.
- Reply
- Report
TheCakeIsaPie - November 4, 2010 2:21 a.m.

I really wish they would have made Mirror's Edge 2 instead.
- Reply
- Report
Gameguy94 - November 4, 2010 12:27 a.m.

I think DICE was too focused on Bad Company 2 and their upcoming Battlefield 3 to put the required amount of care into Medal of Honor's multi-player. As for what went wrong at Danger Close I have no clue.
- Reply
- Report
Z-man427 - November 3, 2010 11:32 p.m.

What's the deal with game devs apologizing for their games not meeting or exceeding expectations? If they really thought the games didn't measure up, why didn't they spend more time in development? Because they thought the game did measure up during production. Then the reviews hit and they changed their minds and are now saying these things to keep fans happy.
- Reply
- Report
batmanboy11 - November 3, 2010 11:29 p.m.

I'm suprised that EA isn't just like "We don't care about quality as long as it sells well".
- Reply
- Report
Redeater - November 3, 2010 11:11 p.m.

“Medal of Honor is to some extent judged harsher than it should be. The game is better than today’s reviews are indicating,” .....does this even need a snappy reply?
- Reply
- Report
Baron164 - November 3, 2010 11:08 p.m.

I really enjoyed it and I'm hoping that selling 2 million units will be enough for them to make a sequel. And hopefully put enough time into the sequel and fix the issues people had with this one.
- Reply
- Report
shadowreaper72 - November 3, 2010 10:58 p.m.

I just dont understand why everyone is hating on this game. I loved this game. Its single player coulve been longer sure but it was one hell of a ride while it lasted. It was a reliastic take on the war in the middle east. And the ending was pretty satisfying to me. And for all the people that hate the multiplayer the only reason why they hate it becasue its not a cheap unbalanced noob tubin fag fest like mw2. Face it people mw2 sucks, moh awesome
- Reply
- Report
Tygerclaws - November 3, 2010 10:57 p.m.

Really? The "realistic, modern" shooter that replaced real-world events and made them AMERICA: The Game didn't meet quality expectations? Huh. Go figure.
- Reply
- Report
ventanger - November 3, 2010 10:50 p.m.

Aww... that's a little hard on the game. Sure it didn't make everyone forget about Black Ops, which maybe what they were hoping for, but that's a bit of an unrealistic expectation to overthrow a franchise that's currently just a really hot brand.
- Reply
- Report