How Can MoH Compete With CoD?

03 Dec 2009 at 00:00:00 by Andy Alderson

So, yesterday’s big announcement from EA was that the Medal of Honor series, last seen limping dejectedly towards the knackers yard in Medal of Honor Airborne, is not in fact dead. No, what EA has done, in a veritable masterstroke of originality, is... wait for it... transfer the game to a modern setting.  That must have been quite the meeting. You can imagine the energy in that room, as ideas ricocheted around like small fire. “See, what people won’t be expecting us to do is take on Modern Warfare” *takes a deep pull from the joint* ”because it seems like such a ridiculously derivative idea. So, logically speaking, that’s exactly what we should do.”

OK, so it’s arguably the least original concept since *insert Green Day album title here* but I really want EA to get this right. As much as I love the Call of Duty series, I still have fond memories of the PS1 MoH games, Allied Assault and, to a lesser extent, Frontlines. I also think a little competition will be good for the consumer and, like in so many genres, push both franchises forward.  However, EA has got to do more than wheel Riccitiello out front and centre to sound the EA war cry. It’s all good and well for him to call out Activision, but the game has to do the talking. And let’s face it, since the schism which saw the project leads for Medal of Honor: Allied Assault form Infinity Ward (and subsequently kneecap the MoH series), the franchise has never been the same. So how can EA effectively challenge Modern Warfare?

•  Craft a half-decent story. As action-packed and enthralling as Modern Warfare 2 is, the narrative is about as believable as a Glenn Beck blubathon. According to the press blurb that accompanied EA’s announcement yesterday, the game will focus on real-life Spec Ops-type organisation, the Tier One Operator, and EA has apparently been “working closely” with actual Tier One chaps. Good news, so long as EA strives for the same level of authenticity in the story. Let’s avoid nukes and far-fetched MacGuffins in favour of authentic missions, carried out by three dimensional characters. Also, regarding the ‘18’ rating on the box art, EA must not fall into the trap of assuming that profanity = character. See Rogue Warrior.
• Make a new game engine. One of the main ball-aches with the last MoH game, Airborne, was that the framerate was utterly appalling in places. The dev team clearly didn’t quite get to grips with the Unreal 3 Engine and, as a result, the player suffered. One of MW’s biggest advantages over the competition is a proprietary game engine that manages to be exceptionally smooth while at the same time using upscaling trickery to achieve some tasty visuals. A game that looks great but which runs like Heather Mills on an electromagnet will not cut it.
• Don’t abandon the good ideas. While Airborne, as previously mentioned, had its flaws it also sported some decent ideas, most notably the concept of freedom. Choosing your own insertion point via the parachute meant that the levels could not be entirely linear, which was a step forward for the series. While Modern Warfare 2 thankfully arrived sans-infinitely respawning enemies, you could still feel Infinity Ward’s strong hand on your back, pushing you through the game. Again, this feeds into EA’s authenticity claim and open levels which offer choices are potentially a lot more engaging than a heavily-scripted set-piece fest.
• Work hard on the multiplayer. We all know single player games have a finite appeal and it’s multiplayer which adds true replayability to a game. It’s certainly good to hear that DICE is working on the multiplayer, as it has some serious multiplayer chops, but EA also has to make sure that the net code works and try to avoid the kind of technical clusterfuck that accompanied the launch of Battlefield 1943. We want player squads, tactics, progression, teamplay and, more than anything, new game modes. And that means doing more than just slapping a new name on Capture the Flag. It seems as if objective-based game modes have been inexplicably out of fashion since classics like Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory and it would be nice to feel like you’re actually taking part in a military objective rather than a tarted-up deathmatch. [DICE is also going to have to be careful to make the Medal of Honor multiplayer feel different to Battlefield multiplayer, or EA's going to end up both rehashing recent ground and competing with itself - Ed]
  
• Promote it well. For one, stop talking about innovation. Given that the move away from WW2 to modern warfare has basically turned EA into that guy in the office who still says “wazzzzup,” it’s faintly ridiculous to declare that you’re pushing the boundaries, at least until you can demonstrate the gameplay. There’s some old cliché about writing cheques and being unable to cash them with your bottom. As mentioned earlier, I’m all for competition but let’s keep it clean shall we folks? There’s always a danger of healthy competition descending into bitchiness (*cough* Forza *cough*) which always comes across as unnecessary and a bit silly.

Check out the gaming forums at the moment and you’ll see opinion divided. Some believe the franchise, like Tomb Raider, is dead in all but definition, while others maintain it can be revived if EA takes care. I find myself firmly in the latter category.

Get it right, EA. Prove it’s a good idea.

Comment