Anyone play this one its my all time favorite
Amd my favorite too.
I have played in all parts except last MoH:Airborne forces. I don’t know is it reailised already fro sale?
Not as good as Call of Duty however.:rolleyes:
i would have to agree with panzerknaker but medel of honor still was a good game
I like espionage in MOH, something COD lacks… 
Yer Moh has it’s own atmosphere and style unlike the CoD.
The CoD is the best but some of missions in MoH were very interesting.
BTW both games were developed on the modernized Quake3 engine. At least befor appearing the MoH:Pathific assault and CoD2.
I like particulary the mission on the Russian side, the U.S army mission are a little repetitive.
The “playability” of call of Duty 1 is the best, in the 2 is sometimes hard to find were the hell they shooting at you.
In the Call of Duty 2 the best missins are the british tank.
Well I have played all of the Medal of Honor games on PS2. I have not played Medal of Honor: Airborne Assault on the Xbox360. It looks pretty good.
Like Panzersnacker said it is not good as Call of Duty. I totally agree with you.
I too agree with Panzerknacker, call of duty1 and 2 are a little bit better than medal of honor.it’s still a good game.
I love MoH: Frontline. The best portion had to be the Omaha Beach landing at the beginning.
MoH: Underground was surprisingly good too. I thought it was funny how Germans would hit on Manon when she was in disguise.
I didn’t like European Assault that much. There were times where I felt that completing a level felt more like a chore than a good time, especially with the last one. Once you get to the bunker, the toughest part in the game, your squad, if it survived, just decides to ditch you, leaving you to fight by yourself.
i like call of duty 1 and duty alot more than MOH…
but i do have to give MOH credit, they have had some good versions come out
Although, I thought MOH European Assault was a big dissappointment
I agree about MoH: EA. My main gripe is that the game had so much potential to be so much better. I felt the game was trying a little to hard to be a Call of Duty clone, when the CoD was originally developped by MoH staff anyway.
Yes, I agree with you.
Remember all the TV Commericals they had with the intro “When people ask me what we did in the war, I tell them, we fought…for what was right” ?
MOH was defintely threatened by the COD Franchise. And then tried to compete with COD by releasing European Assault. Which any idiot who knows how to work a joystick knows that European Assault was fit enough to shadow COD.
My personal favorite MOH is Allied Assault
(I always believe that RISING SUN was a big dissappointment as well)
Not just a disappointment, I felt Rising Sun was an all-round lackluster effort of EA. There were some hysterical moments with the glitchy AI. For example, in Singapore Sling, there were two Japs in a room. I took out one with the very noisy M1911; however, the other guy didn’t seem to acknowledge my existence. XD Also, I’ve seen things like Gunny run off behind me, and then appear in front of me. There were also glitches that caused scripted events to not occur. Example, in Singapore Sling, the kitchen door was locked when it was supposed to be open. Also, in Pistol Pete showdown, I’ve seen Lt. Harrison just wandering when he was supposed to set up the TNT so I can destroy the Japanese artillery.
BTW, did anyone besides me notice that European Assault’s visuals actually seemed worse than Frontline’s? I mean, compare the Germans in both games. The Frontline Germans were nicely detailed with great facial expressions whereas the European Assault Germans all seemed squinty with somewhat 2D mouths.
I think Medal of Honor: Underground was a surprisingly good game. The graphics, if anything, showed how limited the PS1’s hardware was. Still, I actually was quite impressed with the enemy AI. Also, I thought Manon Batiste was a surprisingly good lead character as well. It was a nice change to play as a French Underground operative instead of an American soldier.
yes, I also didn’t like the Revive things you got on European Assault. Which was telling the gamer, blow up an objective, and you’ll get a revive. Which means u wont have 2 worry about just walking into a room of 15 germans. lol
Plus it just seemed like ur squad on EA were slow. By the time they figured out what the objective is, you’ve already blown it up
That adrenanline feature was nice tho
I hate the revives for a different reason. When you die, you wake back up in the same shootout with only part of your health restored, so you may wind up dying again if your squad isn’t there to save you. Especially when you get to the bunker at the end of the last level, it’s all too easy to use up all of your revives in one spot.:shock:
lol… i kno. It’s like if you die when a German melees you, your gonna revive with the German still meleeing u… serisously. lol
This game could have had so much more potential if EA hadn’t tried to make it into something it was not
I just got Call of Duty 3. After playing that game for a little bit, I can tell MoH:EA was REALLY trying to be another Call of Duty. As far as I know, CoD 3 was supposed to be largely unchanged from CoD2 (3 is my first Call of Duty game).
Anyway, proof that MoH staff made Call of Duty 3: I think the French Maquis leader you meet in the first mission as a British paratrooper bears an uncanny resemblance to Medal of Honor’s Manon Batiste.
i find this same issue, with reviving, but Bwing5543, the thing is that that style of squad is in all of the Medal of Honor games, i have found that MoH: Vanguard your squad somewhat stays near you and in some situations your squad actually protects you. which i find more realistic than the squad leaving you especcially in MoH: European Assult.
i enjoyed pacific assault’s method of the revive, using the corpsman