User Reviews (1 - 11 of 18)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Too hard???

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 8 / 8
Date: January 08, 2006
Author: Amazon User

I've read a previous review that this game is too hard on the normal level setting. That is simply not the case at all. This game was made to be realistic in many aspects and I believe that it is VERY accurate on gameplay and the amount of shots a player can take before being killed. This game is no stand-up-run-around-directly-up-to-the-krauts-and-shoot-them-dead-all-the-while-taking-rounds-and-living type game at all. It requires that you move and act like you are fighting in a real war while taking cover and dodging enemy fire and being TACTICAL. Imagine yourself being fired upon by rifles in real life and not taking some type of cover. This game is way beyond the 1990's Doom first person shooter and I'm glad of it. The fact that it takes 2-3 hits from enemy fire before having to seek medical attention in the game is actually pretty lenient if you ask me and if the game is played smartly there is plenty of med kits to pick up and use. This is not the game for you if you're the type that likes to run through a $30-$40 game in a few hours and be done. The object is to play the game and enjoy it, not see how fast you can finish, that's pointless and impossible with this game. I'm playing the veteran level now and the challenge makes the replay value of this game very enjoyable.

Frustratingly hard...

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 10 / 12
Date: December 05, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Graphics/sound: a slight improvement over Frontline (don't know about Rising Sun; haven't played it).

Multiplayer: yawn.

Playability: okay, whatever. Playing this game, you get the feeling the designers are Nazi sympathizers who're annoyed Germany lost WWII, 'cause all the German soldiers in this game are only a sprocket away from full-on cyborg invincibility (this on the "Normal" difficulty level).

The German soldiers are WAY more accurate than you - YOU have to hit 'em 6 or 7 times to waste 'em, while THEY can deprive you of life with a single bullet or two (the only exception to this is during the 2.5 seconds you actually get to use a sniper rifle).

Especially the Stalingrad levels (which is a misnomer, 'cause you're never really IN Stalingrad) - man, those are SADISTICALLY hard - I swear, the "Normal" difficulty setting is like "Ultra Super-Hard Champion Annihilation" mode in these levels.

Note to game designers/developers: making a game really effing hard (thereby making it take longer to finish) doesn't increase length - it's like they're trying to fool us into thinking the game is longer than it is only 'cause it took forever to finish 'cause it was so ridiculously HARD - NOOOO, GAME DEVELOPERS, NOOOO, THAT'S NOT HOW YOU ADD "VALUE" TO A GAME!!!

This game is ridiculous. I'm not a glutton for punishment, but I love WWII shooters, even the mediocre ones. But I can't forgive cheap death after cheap death after cheap death, with which this game is astoundingly plagued. Enemy soldiers seem to materialize out of thin air, or out of your pants - it's like there's a German solider in your pants at the beginning of the level, and then 75% of the way through, when you're low on ammo and health, THAT'S when he decides to pop out and blast you - "Surprisen, mein herr!" KA-BOOM!

Now, I made it through Frontline and Call of Duty 2 just fine on their "Normal" difficulty settings, but European Assault is ridiculous. There're only four levels, and the difficulty ramps up dramatically (and unfairly) with the Stalingrad levels - it's like the developers realized the game was going to be short and decided to "toughen things up" so it'd take longer to beat, which (they hope) would make you think you've played a longer game than you really have.

Is this just me, or did anyone else out there have a similar experience? If so, let me know...

Better than Frontline

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 5 / 5
Date: July 05, 2005
Author: Amazon User

European Assault is a very good game, and certainly the best MOH yet, even better than Frontline. You play as Lt. William Holt working for the OSS. And unlike previous MOH's, in European Assault, you actually have three squad mates with you during each mission. You can position them where you want and they will take out the enemy, so you don't die. That's another thing, the AI in this game is superb. You squad does not just sit there and make you do all the work. And the enemy AI is just as good. The Germans will shoot if you do not take cover, and they don't just stand in the middle of nowhere, just waiting to be shot. They hide behind anything that will keep them from dying. And they pop up out of a shrub or brush and scare the living daylights out of you. You must have quick reflexes to play this game. The one fault with the AI is that the enemy is very predictable and do the same actions over and over again.

The gameplay and the maps are the best I've seen. Each mission is not just a path to victory. You have to explore to find the best way to achieve your goals, and there are many goals in one mission. For instance, you have a primary objective and then you have 2,3,4, or even 5 secondary objectives to achieve. The way you want to go about doing them is up to you. Also, in each mission, there is a high ranking German officer that you must kill. These guys don't die easily and you have to put up a fight. The missions in this game are extremely hard the first time you play, because everything is unpredictable and there are many surprises along the way. But after that, it becomes fairly easy, but still pretty hard. O yeah, did I mention that that was on the lowest difficulty level. I haven't played the on the next three difficulty levels, but I'm sure they are pretty hard if I had trouble with the lowest level. On each mission, there are available medkits throughout the map ( except on the highest difficulty), which will help heal you and your squad mates. Be sure to use them wisely.

The guns in this game are great, with a very wide variety, however, you only get to hold two at a time. The German tiger tanks look exactly like the real thing, and they are very hard to destroy, even with a bazooka. The sound effects are THE BEST ever. Each gun has its own unique sound. You hear, and feel, bombs go off next to you. Listening for the movement of the tiger tanks makes you feel like you are actually on the battlefield. The graphics are above average, but dont compare to Halo 2 or Chaos Theory. (NOTE: you know when there are people next to you in a game and you kinda get stuck in a corner and can't move. The guys at EA games did not allow that in this game. Instead, you can walk through the people(if they're not German enemies) so you do not get annoyed and have to restart the mission. Now, my friend thinks this is poor graphics, but believe me, it is a good thing and keeps you from getting frustrated.) I was very dissapointed that there was no XBOX LIVE, because it would have been awesome. However, the MULTIPLAYER is very good and a nice treat for you and your friends.

The ending to this game (The Battle of the Bulge) (VERY HARD TO COMPLETE) leaves one to believe there will be another MOH coming in the future(...). Wonder when it will come out. Hopefully, EA Games will make the game EVEN MORE better than European Assault, with better everything and hopefully (and finally) XBOX LIVE for Medal of Honor.

too short but oh so sweet

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 4 / 4
Date: July 25, 2005
Author: Amazon User

i knew right from the beginning that playing MOH: European Assault wasnt going to be any groundbreaking experience. Even hardcore fans of the series have to admit that Medal of Honor has been on a downward slope. Frontline in 2002 was a awesome game but 2003's Rising Sun was less than adequete. European Assault rests happily between the two titles....it is a good game. I give it 5 stars because it's clearly taking the series in a positive direction. The gameplay feels far more intense than any game in the MOH series. I feel the game takes a cue from Call of Duty in that respect. Graphically, this game is very decent. The framerate is very nice as well as consistent. Textures are muddy and blurry but overall in the visual department, this game is solid, just nothing we havent seen before. The sound is excellent, certainly deserving of praise. The THX surround support pulls gamers into the heat of combat. And for the first time since Frontline, the series has a wonderful score, all composed by Christopher Lennertz. The music and sound effects are great. The weapons used in this first person shooter are average fare. Although a few new weapons such as the T-18 are present. Overall the weapons handel very accurately and feel incredibly powerful. There are no real problems in the gameplay, only that its quite a brief experience. It only took me about 6 hours. Luckily the multiplayer is fun. Like the singleplayer game it isnt anything new, just the basic modes like deathmathch and such, but there is an intense element that makes the multiplayer enjoyable. The overall presentation of the game is very nice, the menus are simple to navigate and the in-game cinematics are quite impressive, if only the actual game looked as good, (sighs). Thats not to say this game looks bad, just saying the opening cinematic gets you prepared for so much more. The first four missions in the game take place in 1942 France with the Brit's raid on St. Nazaire. These levels are very intense and the third even shows off some cool lighting effects as you fight thru a lightning storm. The following levels in Africa and Russia are enjoyable but each of these campaigns is very short, two missions each. I liked seeing the Russian PPSH in a Medal of Honor game too. The final three levels in Belgium during the Battle of the Bulge in 1944 are possibly the best in the whole game. If things continue at this rate, Medal of Honor Airborne, lauching on the PlayStation 3 next spring, should certainly be a winner! thanks for reading.

better than MOH: Rising Sun, but worse than just about anything else...

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 4 / 5
Date: August 02, 2005
Author: Amazon User

It is often the case that reviews criticize games for not being what the reviewer really wanted ("Why couldn't there be more of this or less of that?" type of reviews) That is unfair. However, this game is severely flawed, mostly because of issues with the set-up and execution of the game. The missions, in and of themselves, are interesting enough to make for good game play. I especially liked the Russian missions, as it seems that the Russian World War II experience is largely lacking in video games. But, overall, this game has a "rushed" feel to it, as if the developers were hurried along to compete with other games like Brothers in Arms.

For example, there is no easy way to save your progress. You are given varying numbers of "revives" during a given mission but you can't easily quit in the middle of one without losing all of your progress. So, if you are killed within a long campaign, you are forced to start all over again. Likewise, the squad based component is preschool-esque when compared to that of Brothers in Arms, and your squad often gets in your way during heated battles or stands by next to an enemy that kills you. Finally, the multiplayer aspect has no cooperative level and is really no great improvement on previous multiplayer parts of first person shooters.

This game makes for an interesting afternoon but doesn't really have the "umph!" to make it worthy of repeated play!

Fun But Missing Stuff

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 3 / 4
Date: June 30, 2005
Author: Amazon User

When I first played this game I thought it would be like the other medal of honor games. Boring, dull, stupid graphics, And the all alone your invincible by yourself missions. But to my suprise it wasent. The missions were way better because you were fighting alongside allied soldiers and you felt like you were on the front line. You are no longer invincible wich for me is funner than ever because you actually have to duck behind cover in order to stay alive. I love the rag doll animations. Downsides are you cannot get in vehicles like on halo. No machine gun nests or bunkers on multiplayer. no destructable environments like every game should have. Other than that its a very fun game. This game is assuredly a lot better than the other medal of honor games. I would suggest buying this game for the missions. just think no more "I work alone invincible james bond stuff".Good game. Lots of improvement from previous MOH games. Buy it. Trust me its worth it.

Promising but falls far short

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 4 / 7
Date: December 04, 2005
Author: Amazon User

I rented this game after getting Call of Duty 2: Big Red One as a gift and subsequently loving it. I was expecting that a game like MOH:EA that was so hyped back in the summer when it came out would also be a great game. However, while it's a good game, it's not worth owning and in the end is more frustrating than entertaining.

On the plus side, the music and sound effects are great and it's obvious that this is where most of the money went when they were developing this game. I'm not sure if they thought that a great score would cover up the other weaknesses, but there it is. The weapons are very accurate and are the usual mixture of Allied and Axis weaponry. The missions themselves are expansive and varied, taking you from France to Africa to Russia and back again, which is nice. The exploratory flavor of the missions is also great and is something that COD is lacking. The broad gameplay is good and the idea of the exploratory WWII game is novel.

Now for the minuses. The overemphasis on the music at the expense of the rest of the game has already been stated. The graphics in the game are remarkably subpar. The scenary is generic WWII bombed out buildings and the environment is the typical dark, gloomy grey. While it may be dramatic, it's boring and drab. The interiors aren't too complex either and usually consist of maybe one or two rooms and usually only one floor. That also makes the game unnecessarily repetitive. Then you're talking to and fighting with soldiers who are nearly faceless they're so undeveloped. They speak and the mouths just move up and down! Come on, this is Super Nintendo stuff.

While the gameplay's exploratory concept is welcome change, once you get to the details of the game, its usefulness wears off. The whole concept of fighting with and commanding a squad is totally pointless in this game because your comrades either run into gunfire and are mowed down, stand in your way while you try to fire, stand by while an enemy soldier shoots you in the back, or otherwise hastens your demise. In other words, they serve no purpose because the AI is so bad! They shoot at enemies who are behind walls and thus shoot into the wall at point blank range! They throw grenades that bounce off walls and come back at you! So while the enemy has many soldiers with great aim and they shoot you, your friends shoot at nothing.

At times the gameplay seems mismatched with the design. For example, at one point you're holed up in a command post trying to defend it from a Nazi onslaught. The only downside is that you have destroy 3 tanks and literally scores of soldiers with your squad of clowns and a few other soldiers. Even after scouring the board for weapons, you still inevitably run out of ammo, particularly after your idiot squad is killed off as they run out into tank fire. It's almost as if the developers designed the board before the missions. It's completely innane.

Another example of this short-sightedness comes when you have to destroy a Panzer tank or worse, a Tiger tank, with nothing more than grenades! All the while the tank pins you down with machine gun and tank fire, slowly killing you. While this is a challenge of the game, the fact that there aren't enough grenades to detroy the tanks (once it took more than 10 grandes to destroy the tank and in the end I had to kill several Nazis to get their grenades!) is stupid. Why have the tank there if there's no way of killing it?!

Another stupid feature is the revive concept. When you die, you are revived with half of your health at the spot you fell. This is fine if you're behind cover and get hit by sniper fire, etc. But say you're killed by a soldier at close range in melee combat. Well you revive with half health and the soldier is right there, ready to smack your head in again while you try to reorient yourself. And once your revives are gone, you have to restart the level! Medkits help prevent this, but the lack of a convenient saving function on this game frustrates the player.

So as you can see, MOH:EA has some highlights (the score and broad gameplay, for example) but has so many negatives that the game becomes cumbersome and absurd as you play it. By the end, you're so outdone with the stupid design and illogical construction of the boards that you're happy to be done with the thing rather than happy you beat the game.

In other words, don't bother with this waste of a game when you can play COD or Brothers in Arms, which are superior in every sense of the word.

Real Good, not Great but a fine game

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 2 / 2
Date: June 14, 2005
Author: Amazon User

The sounds and graphice are quite well done, on par with other first person shooters like Splinter Cell and others. The AI is quite better than most making squad control a bit easier and not frustating as your troops don't run off and hide or do something stupid. There is NO XBOX LIVE which is a big letdown as it would have been wonderful to deploy and entire squad of troops together, or even two teams square off on each other. The overall presentation of the game is very well, done. Easy controls and extra attention to detail and physics really add to the game. no more unloading an M-16 into an enemy and having to reload as 1 shot kills you. Multiplayer is lacking as with most FPS nowadays. As said in another eview no "bots". This game is close to greatness but just misses the mark. Its still a good play and good replayability.

Please dont buy this game

2 Rating: 2, Useful: 4 / 9
Date: June 15, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Send a message to the makers of MOH to stop putting out these crappy games buy not getting this game. Only Frontline was any good, and they seem to be resting on their laurels now. European Assault is repetetive, the AI reacts predictably, and the squad commands are limited and pointless. The areas of combat are based in reality, but the missions and battlefields are made up, id rather play Wolfenstein if i wanted that crap. Look, 5 years ago this might be a decent game, but since all the other WW2 games have come out like Call Of Duty, and the phenomenal and authentic Brothers In Arms have come out, it makes it seem that much worse. I dont usually write reviews for anything, but i felt especially passionate about this game.

Awesome Addition!

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 3 / 6
Date: June 09, 2005
Author: Amazon User

Perhaps it is because I am a sucker for the WWII shooter games. They could make one every week and i'd be happy. I just love them. They never ever get old to me. And to me, I think Medal of Honor does a great job making these games. We all know Rising Sun wasn't what everyone thought. I enjoyed it actually, it was just too short. This game gives you the option to do sub-objectives which make each level so much more in depth. The controls have changed slightly to give you more options. You can tell your squadmates where to go if you don't want to get shot up. The reason its 4 stars is because there is no Xbox Live... come on!!! although if it would just be a lame live game then i guess don't bother. But this is definently a good buy!

Review Page: 1 2 Next 

Actions