EA: “Medal of Honor Was An Obvious Miss,” Will Be Taken Out of Rotation of Yearly Shooters

Due to poor performance, Electronic Arts will be pulling the Medal of Honor series out of the rotation of yearly blockbuster shooters.

During an investor call today, chief operating officer Peter Moore commented on some of the challenges EA face this holiday quarter, namely, “the slowdown that impacted the entire sector and poor critical and commercial reception for Medal of Honor: Warfighter.”

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

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.”

Released last October 23rd, Medal of Honor: Warfighter was met with shaky reviews, earning low scores across the board. However, Moore felt they were, “…frankly, lower than it deserved.” We commended Danger Close for a solid multiplayer effort, though it was not enough to keep a happy and healthy community.

Are you sad to see the Medal of Honor franchise go? Do you think the series might ever see yet another “reboot” in the future?






  • MegaMan3k

    It’s a sad loss. I thought Medal of Honor 2010 had one of the most memorable single player campaigns in an “authentic” military shooter since COD4. I thought Warfighter was a surprisingly refreshing experience between the class system – that actually *felt* different – and the amazing FireTeam system. I felt like one more go and they might be able to take the solid SP of 2010 and the solid MP of Warfighter and create a top notch game.

    … That said, should they have done that, they should have picked a release date that wasn’t competing with every top tier shooter franchise out there. Bad Company 2 did a great job at coming out in March – and it maintained an excellent presence through the year. Warfighter couldn’t hope to compete with Halo 4 and Black Ops 2. EA drowned their franchise in a pitiful attempt at a stop-gap until Battlefield 4, and that’s a shame.

    • Well said

    • DoucheJackson

      What’s so “sad” about it? Didn’t anyone read “taken out of rotation of yearly shooters” and not see therein lies the entire problem: This annualized copy-paste cashgrab approach to rush releasing games whether they’re ready or not, whether it makes sense or not. Its become videogames designed around marketing campaigns rather than the other way around.

      Stop making excuses for a terrible game. Stop blaming BLOPS2 and Halo and the timing of the release “not being ideal”. A good game will sell, period. Other shooters that came out at the time had no trouble selling zillions of copies – look at BL2.

      There’s a tolerance limit that consumers have to this kind of nonsense that these megacorp publishers walk right up to the edge of. Activision won’t get away with it forever, the chickens will come home to roost for them like they did for EA.

      • HighBob

        Stop blaming EA for probably making Danger Close bankrupt soon ? Nice one, sir.

      • nightwing2097

        i don’t think you understand EA’s yearly rotation model.
        their annual rotation is as follows, MOH (2010) – BF3 (2011) – MOH:WF (2012) – BF4 (2013?) and so on, so they’ll probably still be releasing MOH games just not as part of that model, if you think MOH was a C&P of BF3 then sir, you’re doing it wrong.

        • NLGamer1995

          Maybe they will start another franchise and stop making MoH.

          • born2expire

            Yeah Respawn’s debut game is due to announce soon.

            • When they are done with that sci-fi crap, EA should pay them well to return back to their MOH roots.

          • nightwing2097

            you never know, they did stop for a while, i think the previous medal of honor before 2010 was pacific assault (i may be wrong) which wa about mid lifespan ps2

            • The Army Ranger

              The MOH game that came out before 2010 was Airborne (or Heroes 2 if you count handheld games), which came out 2007 for the PS3, Xbox 360 and PC.

            • fueldude4000

              I believe it was actually Airborne. But good guess though.

    • NLGamer1995

      I’m actually happy they took medal of honor out of rotation. It’s just a failure and now they have more time for other games.

  • Boxdude1184

    It is pretty disheartening, I thought the game was good as a whole but it definitely needs to find its “place” in the fps market. Long gone are the days of the original MoH’s. I think time off will be good, hopefully they will come back strong on the next generation consoles where the extra horsepower can hopefully allow the developers to pull of some awesome stuff.

  • Boxdude1184

    @MegaMan3k you are right that EA drowned their own game in an attempt to release first. Nothing is wrong with releasing in the spring/summer, if anything people are tired of their games from Christmas and are looking for something new. I don’t see why large companies such as EA don’t see that releasing games in an over saturated market spells disaster, I would think that releasing their game during a AAA game drought such as summer would be logical, especially if you are trying to play catchup.

    • NLGamer1995

      If they moved the release date. MoH warfighter has to compete with crysis 3. EA doesn’t want their games to compete with each other, so releasing it in september actually makes sense.

  • Warfighter multiplayer is actually pretty good, but it suffered a knockout blow from the standards set by Battlefield 3. This much is obvious, I think. BF3 overshadowed MOH: Warfighter, big time.

    I still think Warfighter is very fun to play.. I actually think they did a pretty good job on it (minus the menu/ UI design) and I go back to it often, just like I go back to Bad Company 2.

  • Combat authenticity did not resonate with the customers? Um, no. It’s much more than that. In fact it’s not that at all. Try a clearly rushed, forced, and uninspired game. There was no real passion or inspiration behind the development of the game, it was only made purely to make a little cash and keep the “new shooter every October” pattern going while DICE makes the next main attraction. The game had less originality, personality, and identity than MW3, and that’s pretty bad. Yes the way the weapons handled was authentic, but the overall MP combat experience itself was not even authentic. Even Battlefield is more authentic. The SP was more authentic than most FPS titles but it ended up being too over-the-top, gung-ho, chauvinistic “GO ‘MURICUH!” anyway.

    It just felt like the developers of the game didn’t feel any kind of purpose or inspiration when making the game and when your game has no stand-out identity in an over-saturated FPS market, it’s obviously going to flop.

  • probably for the best unless they were planning on doing a remake/HD upgrade of MOH: allied assault.

  • What really didn’t work was the absolutely terrible user interface. Nothing was easy to find. Nothing in the menus had a sense of efficiency about it. Also, the authenticity really did not resonate with me for sure. Frostbite made that possible. The engine really doesn’t produce a sense of urgency… something that is mostly lacking in FPS games atm.

  • fiqst

    Does this mean they will include the bad company series back in to replace moh? If so, as regretful as losing moh is, this is great news

    • That would be incredible.

    • Mikey MiG

      What, and have another developer besides DICE working on it? Because there’s no way DICE alone could handle making a BF on an annual basis.

    • That would most likely mean handing of the Bad Company series to a developer other than DICE. Don’t think it would happen.

      • MegaMan3k

        I wonder if they would ever consider handing the franchise over to Criterion Games.

        In the past, they proved that they could tackle a militaristic shooter with Black. And with Need For Speed: Most Wanted (2012), they proved that they could take an existing EA Franchise and a) make an amazing iteration, b) add Criterion’s should-be-trademark flavor to create a somewhat fresh feeling game.

        I know a lot of the talent behind Black left – and created the well intentioned, but poorly executed, Bodycount. But I’ll pretend that never happened…

    • of course not … how much differences is exist between BF3 and BC2 ?!! you wanna, comedy aspect ? no jet ? what else ?! colorful maps ?! more destruction ?what else …?!!! these are not enough to stand as separate franchise, let’s not forget that if there was any BC3 in future it’d have been built on FB2 engine and of course a superior animation and smooth gameplay mechanics that came with BF3, which would’ve makes BC3 something very similar to BF3 except comedy and jet aspects. That’s all!

      p.s DICE always can hire some comedians for their game.

      • BC forces more direct completion of the objectives in two ways. 1. Fewer things to do other than the objectives. No jets? Sounds like a plan. More boots on the objective that way. 2. The map designs were smaller and provided no movement outside of toward the objective.

        • Still this isn’t enough to be considered or stands as a separate franchise. All the points you have mentioned is related to map designing! therefore there is no proof or evidence that we won’t be seeing such map design in future BF4…

          • I assure you that DICE is aware that they have something with wide open environments that do not lend themselves to the objective. MANY people like it. I am not one of those people.
            I’m sure many good game designers would disagree with you that the map design is the only thing going into BC2’s mechanics.
            Ultimately, there are fans of wide-open play and there are fans of direct objective-based play, and DICE does both well. It stands that each fan base should each have their own game so as not to annoy or eliminate the other fan base.

            • Base on what you say:

              BF3: Wide maps and less directed objective-based play (+jet).
              BC3: Less wide maps and more directed objective-base play (-jet).

              In all senses, Does this make even a bit sense to you?! Developers and publisher put their money and time for this? two indistinguishable game, just one bigger and one smaller… No my friend, you like BC so much and i understand it. BC was a great spin off game, and all unique aspects of that can be coming to future Battlefield games. It does not have to be a BC3 game to have those characteristics that you like about the game.

    • The Army Ranger

      I doubt that. The Bad Company series might stop when the third one comes out, since it’s the singleplayer that decides how the games will go not multiplayer. A Bad Company game without singleplayer might as well be called something else instead.

  • gae

    Its sad but Warfighter was the most fun I had with an FPS shooter this year. The game was horribly unfinished and still had plenty of issues, but you could still have a lot of fun with it.

    It also helps that CoD has somehow layed an egg 2 years in a row. I didn’t even think that was possible.

  • WarHero

    EA it was your poor marketing decisions that led the distaste on the MoH franchise. It was obvious they wanted to compete with CoD and Halo but that was a grave mistake and it was clearly rushed with many bugs and glitches that clearly DC didn’t have time to fix BEFORE launch. It’s truly sad due to MoH being one of my favorite FPS franchises of all time,EA you nearly destroyed MoH and I say “Fuck You”

    • DoucheJackson

      Couldn’t agree more – loved the original MoH’s, produced back at a time there was still some imagination and their hearts were still in it.

  • Sgt. Mofo

    Any word on Danger Close’s fate?

    • MasonMei

      Come to Activision and try make something against EA lol

  • nelson

    i hope EA learn from there mistakes, and stop making battlefield and medal of honor like call of duty, because if not, battlefield is going to be next. battlefield 3 is still a good game but is the worst battlefield game to date.

    • zakrocz

      Hmm, I think the vehicle game is the worst in the series but the infantry game is the best in the series

      • For the most part I agree. They could get away with jeeps and helicopters that don’t have any weapons on them and actually increase the pacing of the game quite a bit without making vehicles annoying to infantry. But if you are going to do that, you might as well make the maps smaller so there is less travel between objectives and just drop the vehicles altogether.

    • Jonchr2

      How is BF3 the worst??

    • NLGamer1995

      Call of duty should wish to be a game like battlefield 3 and battlefield 3 is really the best game of 2011.

    • I wouldn’t say it is the worst. But I would say that, even with its far inferior graphics, BF1942 is still better than BF3. Bad Company 2 has less to do and slightly inferior graphics and is in my opinion also better than BF3 due to the mechanics of the MP game. I would also say “Who gives a damn about single player?”

    • The Army Ranger

      What about Battlefield Play4Free? With the ill-intentioned update EAsy did back in December 2011, the emphasis on pay-to-win became even bigger. At least in Battlefield 3, that doesn’t happen.

  • I have a very good idea for danger close development team, HOW ABOUT HELPING DICE WITH BATTLEFIELD 4 ? maybe polishing it, fixing the bugs/glitches as early as possible …

    • DoucheJackson

      No thanks I think they’ve done enough damage.

    • NLGamer1995

      Danger Close already failed in the new MoH games, so let’s hope they will cock the battlefield series up too.

      • fueldude4000

        It wasn’t Danger Close’s fault completely. EA screwed up it’s marketing and planning, like how Gearbox jacked with marketing and planning for Aliens: Colonial Marines.

  • jj16802

    What a shame. I was one of the few people who bought the game and actually enjoyed it for what it was. Maybe if it was released in a time where a cluster of games weren’t coming out, it could have had a better chance. For now, I hope Danger Close games can get another chance to work on another MOH project. Maybe return to World War 2 or go into Vietnam?

  • Hol_Up

    It’s put of the yearly rotation, but no one said it was out of bi yearly rotation 🙂

  • Loved Medal of Honor 2010. Hated Warfighter. It needed another year of development. That and less door breaching. That shit got old. Hopefully they get their shit together next time around.

  • JustinD

    I really liked the inclusion of brand name products like trijicon. Wish it would have done better. MoH 2010 had one of the best campaigns

  • BF4 will be launch title.

    This is a smart choice. Why would you have 2 multiplayer franchises by the same company expecially when DICE is leaps and bounds a better studio. BF is all they are gonna need to suceed in the future. Frostbite 2 is a next gen graphics engine, that is from DICEs mouth in a interview. When the next consoles come out and we get 60 frames a second with 64 players or more mouths are going to drop. Thats when DICE will have no competition when these next gen consoles comes out. BF4 in my opinion will be a multiplatform release where it will be on current and next gen consoles. And I predict it will be a launch title for one of the systems. Imagine DICE coming out with BF4 as a launch title for the next gen consoles. Can we say SYSTEM SELLER. I would bet every game I got that will happen. You watch.

    • Absolutely agree with you… Battlefield 4 wil be epic, it will be not only better than BF3 it will be MUCH better than BF3 for list of reasons…

    • DoucheJackson

      So BF4 coming out at the same time a new console comes out and you put two and two together that BF4 might come out on the new console.

      Your words are wise. I had not even considered this.

    • zakrocz

      I believe 64 player BF on next gen consoles is highly unlikely. I expect them to up it to 32, maybe 40, which will be fine with me. 64 player BF is vastly overrated.

      • yes it will

        Go read the early specs. If true testers have already tested bf3 on a similiar set up on pc and they could play bf3 on ultra settings in 1080 p. The new consoles will handle 64 players without question. I can find the article if you want.

    • BF doesn’t appeal to a large enough majority of FPS gamers to really be a system seller. I personally find BF3 to be a very immersive, graphically stunning piece of work. However, the game play has no sense of urgency about it due to how it is designed. There are far too many distractions to deter players from the objective.

      Ultimately, I wanted to see BF3 attract players to the concept of attempting to win by retaining/removing tickets or defending/attacking bomb points. As early as the alpha, this was looking very hopeful, but as it turned out, players were attracted to everything but attempting acquire a win for the team. For me, simply being immersed in a really cool looking battlefield isn’t enough.

      • I agree somewhat

        Honestly I do get your point a little bit. But a lot of that since of urgency falls on the player. If you have good players on both teams fighting for objectives the Battlefield formula works. Only part where they failed is rewarding more points for kills and shit that does not pertain to objectives.Also although fun the assignments are ruining BF3 right now because none of the assignments pertain to objectives either. Personally I do think a lot of people migrated from COD this time around and it has changed BF dramatically because of there play style. But to make a point the sense of urgency all depends on the individual player. I play the objectives hardcore every time I play. Really i dont see this getting better the more popular BF gets because of the other FPS gamers coming to BF. Used too on BFBC2 you would have a lot of close matches now your either on the worst possible team ever or your completely annihilating the other team. there is hardly ever a middle ground. But with all that said BF3 is still the best multiplayer on the market in my opinion.

        • I agree mostly. My only issue with what you’ve said is that urgency falls on the player. That’s great but I’ve learned to mostly depend on trolling from players. It would be rare that they actually try. The game should set the tone and be designed in such a way as too direct the player.

    • The Army Ranger

      You’re kind of right. I doubt COD would do anything good with the next-gen consoles unless a different engine is used. But, we can always know that BF will take advantage of what the next-gen consoles have to offer.

  • Chuckz28

    Focus on combat authenticity didn’t resonate?! WTF is he on? I want more authenticity but I find players highlighted in green and red not very authentic. The gun sounds were not authentic. Score streaks are not authentic. Add in the cumbersome UI and it made me dump the game way faster than I wanted leaving me with no shooter this year.

    • DoucheJackson

      The colored silhouettes around teammates reminded me of Left4Dead games. Broke the immersion.

  • Jamic

    You bunch of retards (EA).

    There was so many threats and pissed off people in old MOH 2010 forums. You had everything and all the signs in there to help with Warfighter and making up for 2010’s mistakes.

    What did you do ?

    Well atleast I know you disregarded everything.

    MOH was already in critical position due to 2010 and in WF you should have allowed DC more time to work with new technology and put more thought into the game. Warfighter should have been briliant with little to no flaws, then you may have gotten something going on but making next game even more bugged and half assed than last one efficiently killed the series.

    Danger Close is good but they cant do miracles.

    And dont get me started with removed attachments.

  • CaseyFTW

    I was an addicted BF3 mp player untill warfighter came out. At first it felt off but after the release of the hunt map pack it plays very sweet. Just a little faster then BF3 and the kill streak bonusses are fun too. Same with the buddy system.

    I’m not a fan of the cod franchise (except the sp) and for me warfighter is just the nice variation in mp to keep me away from BF3 for now. Maybe it wasn’t the blockbuster EA needed it to be, but it got my love and as long as I can get full 20 slot servers (EU) sessions I’ll enjoying every minute of it.

  • yeb that game was a HUGE mistake made by EA

  • Will Smith

    With Crytek’s recent acquisition of the Homefront property, wouldn’t it be possible for them to replace MoH in EA’s lineup with a more polished (read – less cartoony) FPS game? The Cryengine looks like it could change that game for the better. Hopefully, they can create/develop a new series for our entertainment. Frostbite needs to stay with the BF and BC series for the sake of destruction…

  • FUCKEA

    Make WW2 MOH with long campaing and stop the bs of “real soldiers” like 2010 and Warfigther

  • El3

    I think the reviews of this game are a joke. The big thing I heard was that critics didn’t get their game in time so does MOH deserve a bad review for that? Also heard the Campaign was highly repetitive and it got bashed for that. When was the last shooter you played that wasn’t repetitive. I cant remember the last shooter I played that wasn’t, but you don’t see COD and Halo suffering a bad score because of repetitiveness. Any shooter fan knows that the killing system in campaigns is going to get repetitive. A host of enemies come out you kill you move to next check point get a cinematic at the end of the chapter and rinse and repeat. That being said what I look for in FPS campaign is how good the gameplay is, how good the story is, how good the voice acting is, and how good the dialog is between characters. MOH W capitalizes on all those. To get metascore in the 50’s from critics must have meant the whole game should have been laughable from a FPS perspective and it is far from it. EA should have released this in the spring like the Bad Company series. Going up against bigger titles for a shooter that does not have the fan base yet was not very smart.

    my score

    campaign 9.0

    MP 8.0

  • Delta8A

    Do you feel bad for EA/Danger Close? I don’t. Maybe next time, when you listen to your fans and include what we ask in the game, maybe then you’ll be successful. As of now – burn, you idiots, with your FoV of 60, colored silhouettes, and the rest. Not ONE tweet answered… GTFO

  • dpg70

    The game was solid? Did that ass clown play that buggy freaking mess? The gameplay itself was solid and addictive, but to call MoHW a solid release is a joke. It was rushed out the door to grab a share of the FPS dollars before CoD gobbled them all up plain and simple.

  • manfredmar

    it definitely shouldn’t be taken out. Just give Danger Close their time and space that they need, EA shouldn’t be pushing them and making them rush the game just so it can be released before Call of Duty, that’s just stupid.

    EA, please stop being a total jerk and start thinking straight and do your jobs correctly!

    An angry MOH fan that enjoys MOH2010 and WF

  • Remco

    Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 🙁

  • Randomuser

    What these game developers and publishers don’t seem to understand is that people playing these games don’t have infinite time. If you give a consumer the choice between Battlefield and Call of Duty, they will pick one depending on their play style and invest most of their time in it. If you give people the choice between MOHWF and Battlefield 3, the vast majority will stay with the superior Battlefield title that all their friends are playing and continue to invest time in that. Just because there is a “new” FPS game out, doesn’t mean it will automatically be a commercial success.

  • roland0811

    Maybe, just maybe they should take a step back and look at all of the cookie cutter run ‘n gun shooters that have been released the last several years (CoDs, BF3, MoH ’10, Counter Strike, Crysis 2, Halo 4, Halo: Reach, OFP: Red River and now MoH:W) and try and do something different, innovative and original. Be different and go big. Stop rushing these half-assed games.

    Game publishers have been replacing fun and innovative gameplay with shiny graphics and empty linear crap. The industry has shifted to quantity over quality over the past four or five years and it unfortunately doesn’t show any signs of improving.

    • zakrocz

      There’s literally tens of millions of us who are quite happy with our “cookie cutter” online military shooters like COD and BF. I don’t want them to mess up the formula, it works and it works very well. I want better graphics, more players, more destruction on consoles. I don’t want major innovation at the cost of losing a successful formula. I’ve been playing BF for 11 years now and there’s no signs of me getting bored anytime soon.

      • roland0811

        To each their own, man. It’s that exact mentality as to why gaming has been going downhill. You may be happy playing unoriginal clones of games for years and years, but I personally can’t see myself eating the same bland bowl of cornflakes over and over and being happy with that. I prefer them to make better games, not keep making the same thing over and over again. But if the same thing over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again is your cup of tea, by all means drink up, bud.

  • Pingback: Awtheme | Medal of Honor Franchise Still Part of EA’s “Key Considerations for Fiscal Year 2013 Plan”()

settings

close