Medal of Honor: Vanguard Critic Reviews

You will love the crisp graphics and refreshingly exciting gameplay. You will love the constant action and atmospheric sound effects. You will grin like a Cheshire cat when manning machine-gun nests and spraying bullets in every direction.

No surprises here. Presentation is handsome and the game is a pleasure to play. But haven’t we seen this far too many times already?

Normally we don't mind short and sweet, but you could seriously finish the game in one long afternoon. Still, despite some frustrations, the game is mostly an intense, exciting, and worthy entry in the long-running series.

Decent.

A solid if unexciting WWII game on either platform. There’s little reason to pick up the game unless you blasted through "Call of Duty 3" and are looking for more.

A good old-fashioned FPS. It looks scrappy and it's short on innovation, but the combat makes up for it.

If you’re a Medal of Honor fan, you’ll dig this title...However, if you felt like previous incarnations of this WWII title were getting closer and closer to being dishonorably discharged, Vanguard’s paper-thin story, monotonous maps and upper-level frustration won’t have you saluting this soldier’s latest effort.

Vanguard literally drops you into the middle of some truly spectacular and thrilling skirmishes but it also mixes these exciting moments with some really dull ones that slow the action down.

Medal of Honor contiues to kick ass at what it does best, but the formula has definitely started to wear thin.

As an FPS, the game offers steady action and decent A.I., but is often repetitious and does very little to shake the formula.

Despite the lack of originality, Vanguard has drawn on a wealth of experience, meaning that thanks to some great level design and a wonderfully atmospheric soundtrack, there is no need to rely on the wealth of triggered animated events that overwhelm Call of Duty 3 at times.

The genre has moved on in terms of gameplay, presentation and even hardware, leaving Vanguard feeling like a relic from years ago rather than something to whet your appetite for EA’s next effort.

Medal of Honor: Vanguard isn’t a terrible game. It’s just that the majority of the game is so mundane and average that the only part that really sticks out is the points that are below average.

AI is good, but could be much better. Graphics are decent, but are exceedingly bland and unexciting. Map design is incredibly limited to the point of frustration.

This is the poorest Medal of Honor yet, and we truly hope we can expect a vastly superior experience from the upcoming "Airborne."

The biggest problems with Vanguard lies in its graphics and overall length. It takes only six to eight hours to complete the game on normal, and graphically the game looks like it’s seen some serious battle.

Though you can get used to the sub-par controls, there’s still no real reason to play Vanguard, from the uninspired level design to the tired subject matter. Sure, it works on a basic level in that you shoot Nazis and they fall down. Beyond that, there isn’t much here to enjoy.

There's really nothing here that gamers haven't seen elsewhere, and frankly, if they've never played a Medal of Honor game, they'd be better off picking up the compilation pack that contains much better installments of the series.

That no significant improvements have been made in five years is surely the final proof that Medal of Honor's PlayStation campaign has lost its way.

There's no great gameplay to be found in Medal of Honor: Vanguard, so there's nothing to hide those feelings of déjà vu that you'll get when you play it. Nearly everything in the game has been done before, and it has all been done better.