Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault Review

Developer: EA Publisher: EA
Release Date: November 9, 2004 Also On: None

I have ranted quite a lot in many of my reviews for this site. You can say it helps me connect with the reader. Let them see what I see without all this corporate propaganda, so to put. Heck, you can say I am “unprofessional�. Now let me restate another one of my rants: there are too many WWII games out in the market. Want an example? Just a week ago, Kyle gave me a package of 5 games to review with a note saying: “Have Fun –Kyle�. I look through the package and see 3 of the 5 games were WWII games (which is shocking for the ones who didn’t understand this example). The sheer number of them isn’t the problem. It is just how many bad WWII games that are released. The reason why so many are awful is because we have seen the same event over and over again, in pretty much the same presentation. Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault follows the first part of this trend, but doesn’t follow the second part of this tendency.

Disclosure: We may earn a commission from links on this page

This game focuses on the conflict with Japan. The game plays like a normal FPS, so I won’t go into the basics. You play as a young marine named Tom Conlin sent to Japan. Having a little more than 20 missions, some levels are good while some are disappointing. 45% of the missions are interesting, 25% are mediocre, and the last 30% of the missions (the vast majority of them are found later in the game) are quite hard and lengthy.

The biggest flaw with the game is that it fails to be original enough. Sure, it has some great features, but what separates it from the rest of the herd of sheep that are bound to fall off the cliff? People could just play Medal of Honor: Allied Assault and be satisfied. MoH: PA’s gameplay is just MoH: AA’s with better physics, improved AI, and new scenery. For the improved physics, I wouldn’t compare them to such games like Half-Life 2, but the improvements are nice. The AI was improved, but yet again, not as good as some games that were released this year. Expect around 14 hours for the single player.

The game’s multiplayer is run of the mill. There is a free-for-all mode, team deathmatch, and an invasion mode. The first two are quite common in the vast majority of other games with multiplayer features, but the invasion mode is a unique addition. Think of the game as Return to Castle Wolfenstein. While it is not going to replace Battlefield 1942, it will give you some hours of enjoyment.

As for the storyline, it could be better. While MoH: PA’s plot is by far better than the vast majority of other WWII games, I see a lot of unused potential. The creators of the game purposely didn’t put that much violence into the game, which is sad, because the game could have used it to its advantage. I don’t support mindless violence added to sell the game, but I do support anything that would add to the theme or mood of the game. Nearly every WWII game fails to really show how the war actually was.

A good friend of mine actually fought in WWII, and boy, he sure has some stories to tell. He occasionally does tell me what he had to do in WWII, but he won’t sugarcoat or exaggerate what happened. Everytime I do talk to him, though, he gives an amazing amount of details that gives me the clearest picture possible (other than actually being there). My friend went to hell and back. That is how scary it was. He once got shot in the knee and was forced to see the rest of his squadron run past him, without receiving any help from his comrades because they couldn’t take their mind off the enemy (it was actually an order). He once saw his friend get shot in the eye and stomach and watched him slowly die.

I suggest that the next MoH game for the PC should be as violent as possible, but should get an M rating, otherwise the sales will be terrible. Parents will say that then the game won’t be for kids. That is the point; this game is for the mature or the ones who think they are mature. Wouldn’t it be nice if we can show the youth of the nation what war is really like? Hiding the horrors of war is more or less a censor on the freedom of an open society.

The graphics are well done, but could be a little bit better. I did see some graphical glitches, but none caused any damage in the gameplay score. The audio on the other hand, is the closest you can get to perfection in a WWII game. The voice acting is top notch. Sound effects are through the roof. It is the game’s best card.

While the game’s single player and multiplayer modes aren’t exceptional, they still will give you hours of gameplay. Not revolutionary, the game is evolutionary when compared to its predecessor, Allied Assault. I wish that in the next game EA will hire someone like Steven Spielberg to help out, considering he did make Saving Private Ryan (which goes without saying that the movie was exceptional). I recommend this game for all those MoH and WWII fans when it hits a cheaper price.

Graphics: 9
Sound: 10
Gameplay: 8
Creativity: 6
Replay Value/Game Length: 8
Final: 8.3
Written by Simon Review Guide

Leave a Comment