Mechanically one of the worst triple A shooters I've ever played. I also doubt it's just me playing now rather than on release as there were countless titles released by the point Medal of Honor came out that exceeded it in every way. The controls are clunky. Turning while moving reduces your speed, jumping is handled worse than any other game of its era + you need to get a run up to actually get over obstacles, and shooting is a mess. The game somewhat tries to replicate legacy 'Goldeneye' style controls despite playing on a controller with two analogue sticks, and removing the snap style of aiming, opting instead for a very slow standard aim method that you need to initiate with R2. The gunplay is equally bad. Comparing it against other console shooters of the time period, Medal of Honor is outdone by virtually every N64 shooter I've played, as well as the Rainbow Six Playstation game, which was in itself not very good to begin with. Due to the low draw distance, you can get shot by enemies you can't even see. Enemies AI is such that they don't react to gunfire within meters of them if they are not looking at you leading to comical situations where you can be engaged in a battle with one enemy and have another patrolling beside you. The levels feel completely on rails, which is not bad in itself, but miss an objective and it's either backtracking sometimes all the way to the start, or finish it up and have to redo it again. It feels incredibly obnoxious as this game carries the level design of a modern military shooter as opposed to a classic 'Doom-style' shooter with maze like design. There are also a few 'stealth' levels which involve you being disguised and having to show your papers to virtually everyone you meet while you kill people with a silenced pistol in a predetermined order. If you miss the paper presentation to any guard, even if you're not looking at them and walking to fast, the base goes on alert. They are a bit more open-ended and less linear than the combat levels, but sadly not any more fun to play. Last but not least, this game has numerous annoyances. I got shot through walls numerous times, I used a shotgun to insta-kill at medium range, despite a rifle taking two shots, even to the head, panzershrek wielding soldiers blew me up instantly from full health sending me back to the start of the level, enemies perform prefire animations lasting whole seconds, fail to shoot me in the back at point blank range and toss back virtually every grenade rendering them useless (there's no cooking available) unless I get a direct hit, instantly detonating it. They also die to their own grenade throws way more than mine. I feel the phrase 'hasn't aged well' is used more often than not to excuse the poor and overrated games of yesteryear. I cannot see this game being considered good in 1999. The sound design and orchestral score were good, yes, and the writing wasn't too bad, but that doesn't excuse the fact that the unpolished gameplay fails to reach anywhere near the same level as the other shooters on offer at the time, on both console and PC.
There's nothing bad about sleeping dogs, but there isn't anything it does that's really good or makes it stand out from other open world gta-clones. The game had a decent combat system, light/heavy strikes, grapples & dodging by pressing the y button at the right time. It's presentation wasn't as stylised as I would've thought, however still fun. The driving part was much less praise-worthy. It holds up in the game, however the mechanic feels too arcady & out of place with the story. It did have a few interesting features such as ramming, bike jumping & hijacking other vehicles by jumping onto them from a motorcycle, however as the game progresses, these become very repetitive features in their presentation. Story in sleeping dogs was good on a surface level. It had emotional climaxing & a few memorable moments however, overall, it was a been there done that kind of thing. There was nothing special about it. Despite having solid programing & a fighting system with no real flaws, it is unfortunately a highly repetitive game, & after finishing it, it becomes a completely forgettable experience.
Do not be persuaded by the pro-blacklist "stealth revisionists". Those who are willing to make compromises to prolong the life of the stealth genre, if it can even be called stealth in a few years. Revisionism is dangerous, our precious stealth genre will only detract more & more from stealth & water the genre down, turning into nothing but an action game with gadgets. The game's most disgusting feature is the "win" button, which lets the player kill every single thing in an area with the press of a button, usually without getting detected as well, the player even does this while running. As if that was not enough, the game adds in alternate pathways which lets the player avoid combat, which the game calls "Stealth" or "Ghost". Pure insult. Some people may argue that the game can be played like chaos theory or sar but when you look at it, any game can, & blacklist certainly wasn't designed to be played that way. Imagine trying to play a Call Of Duty game like Chaos Theory, sneaking around & knifing people in the back. It would not work at all. If you have any love for this series left, then please, do not purchase the game, don't encourage ubisoft to release more nonsense in the franchise. Air strike's, win buttons, & head on cover shooting has no place in Splinter Cell. Give this game a 0 & spread the message.
Do not be persuaded by the pro-blacklist "stealth revisionists". Those who are willing to make compromises to prolong the life of the stealth genre, if it can even be called stealth in a few years. Revisionism is dangerous, our precious stealth genre will only detract more & more from stealth & water the genre down, turning into nothing but an action game with gadgets. The game's most disgusting feature is the "win" button, which lets the player kill every single thing in an area with the press of a button, usually without getting detected as well, the player even does this while running. As if that was not enough, the game adds in alternate pathways which lets the player avoid combat, which the game calls "Stealth" or "Ghost". Pure insult. Some people may argue that the game can be played like chaos theory or sar but when you look at it, any game can, & blacklist certainly wasn't designed to be played that way. Imagine trying to play a Call Of Duty game like Chaos Theory, sneaking around & knifing people in the back. It would not work at all. If you have any love for this series left, then please, do not purchase the game, don't encourage ubisoft to release more nonsense in the franchise. Air strike's, win buttons, & head on cover shooting has no place in Splinter Cell. Give this game a 0 & spread the message.
A great accomplishment in game design. Great multiplayer, single player's still good. Both terrorist hunting & team survival will keep you entertained for quite a long time. Too bad they can't make a game like this anymore.
