Talk:Medal of Honor: Warfighter

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wii U and Vita[edit]

I've not seen any confirmation that this is being released on Wii U, should we remove it? I'm removing the PS Vita one, as it was said to be an error and we have a section saying exactly that.

Preacher[edit]

I thought Preacher (from MOH2010) was going to be a playable character. 64.228.214.125 (talk) 00:43, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tier 1?[edit]

In the trailers they refer to the various units playable in the multiplayer mode as "tier 1" but the tier system is an american system (which states the level of funding units get, not some kind of rank) so technically they are not "tier 1" or any other tier status. Therefore I think we either should not referr to them tier 1 units and/or mention that EA/Danger Close falsely do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.47.151.17 (talk) 15:28, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't Tier 1 units supposed to special forces units basically? 70.27.129.93 (talk) 02:19, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No. In the American Special Operations Community, each unit has a Tier Statur (1,2 or 3) that determines how much money they get. It is a system only used in the USA (although other militaries might have comparable funding levels) and it does not say anything about how "elite" a unit is. --91.114.182.1 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:13, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request edit[edit]

Hi, Danger Close have confirmed that Need For Speed creators Criterion Games and Black Box have also help develop Medal Of Honour Warfighter.

"Danger Close has worked alongside veteran Need For Speed developers to aid in the development"

"I think Warfighter is a great exhibition of that, not only with working closely with DICE, but we brought one of the guys from Criterion on, and Black Box. You've got all these guys working together on a single product."

http://www.videogamer.com/xbox360/medal_of_honor_warfighter/news/need_for_speed_team_working_with_danger_close_on_medal_of_honor_warfighter.html

Amazon pre orders[edit]

I don't think the info on pre orders is very useful. We are not the news. I await other opinions. Dbrodbeck (talk) 23:55, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would also think that any information put in this article should be specific to this game, not general information about Amazon deliveries. -- Fyrefly (talk) 00:37, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, Modern Warfare 3, Black Ops, and Battlefield 3 all have pre-order details in their Marketing sections. To not include it this article is inconsistent with what is already precedent. Just because you do not think it is useful doesn't mean other people don't as well. That is your own opinion. Including pre-order information does not make Wikipedia the news. It provides information that readers might find useful if they are interested in the game. This is why it is included in other Wiki articles. Puro spana (talk) 01:30, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a news site, and the information will be worthless in a few days. Also, I am talking about one retailer, not the game itself. Dbrodbeck (talk) 03:45, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Reception[edit]

While I do not like the game so much myself, it's clear the reception part is biased. There's not even a link to rotten tomatoes or metacritic, an aggregated score from one of these sites should be listed instead of only 1 review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.146.100.43 (talk) 17:27, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The funny thing is that independent reviewers are giving to this game positive reviews, can we add it to this article? 201.58.241.231 (talk) 01:02, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another interesting review can be found here: http://hotextract.com/130/medal-of-honor-warfighter-review/. Hotextract.com is back by SOFREP, a site dedicated to special operations stuff and run by SpecOps people. Hot Extract gave Warfighter almost perfect scores in Authenticity, Tactics, and the Campaign, slagging the game only on multiplayer. It ended up ranking much higher than CoD Black Ops II (3.7 out of 5 as opposed to 1.7 out of 5). Intothatdarkness 15:23, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

Don't know what's going on with the references but they are currently full of errors such as wrong titles and incorrect author names ie. the same name used for multiple references. Makes me think editors have been copy/pasting ref templates and not changing all the details. I'l fix some, but please editors, use proper ref templates or use the Reflinks tool. - 220 of Borg 15:39, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sailor vs. Soldier[edit]

In the Controversy section, users continue to change "soldier" to "sailor." As I said before, "sailor" may be the correct internal term, but the cited articles do not refer to the SEALs as sailors. My argument is that when readers see "sailor," they have this distinct image in their mind that they must have consulted them on the naval aspect of the game when in fact that isn't the case.

People in the Air Force are referred to as Airmen, but they still fall under the "soldier" blanket term (because training is required in more than their dominant field).

Any insight, guys? QValintyne (talk) 22:42, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Navy SEALs are from the United States Navy, they are called Sailor regardless whether anyone likes it or not. This is an Encyclopedia Website not a GameStop review section where inaccuracy is okay. The only one you should be calling Soldiers are from the United States Army, if they're from the Marine Corps they are called Marine, if they're from the Air Force they are called Airman, it as simple as that. And no it's not okay to create a blanket terms when the definition is already is as defined. If the readers has a problem with that then they need to educate themselves. 16:30, 24 November 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.166.155.174 (talk)

I changed it so we don't need either sailor or soldier. Dbrodbeck (talk) 02:55, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for that. For the record, my argument was not against the correct terminology. My argument was that the articles did not explicitly refer to this and I was asking for clarification here. No need for brash, angry comments denouncing my concern. QValintyne (talk) 07:11, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, some people ought to read WP:CIVIL..... Dbrodbeck (talk) 13:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You edited the word into an incorrect meaning when the original one was already proper as it was, because you stated that it would be "misleading". Wouldn't it be even more misleading to call a member of the United States Navy a Soldier? Not only that, but you REVERTED back AGAIN to your wrongful definition when other people had tried to correct it for you, instead of using the Talk Page to debate about the subject, then make chages. As I've already mentioned before, Wikipedia is an Encylcopdia Website, it's not "okay" for you to subsitute a word for other meanings just because you think it would look or sounds better like some novel. If you have a problem with that, then you shouldn't even be making any edit in the first place. 76.166.155.174 (talk) 13:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's fixed, there is no need to get worked up. Dbrodbeck (talk) 13:40, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Medal of Honor: Warfighter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:50, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Medal_of_Honor:_Warfighter&oldid=1203953625"