Medal Of Honor VS Call Of Duty: Tussle Association

The Tussle Is Going To War Folks!

They enjoyed the spotlight, they kicked off the FPS craze, but only one of them can reign supreme! Today in Tussle Association we will be throwing in the most iconic first person shooters in the mix, and decide once and for all who is the king of the rootin tootin run and shootin.

 

Our contestants will be judged based on

Realism

Story

Multiplayer

Gameplay

 

Arm your pistols and shine your boots folks, we are deploying

Medal Of Honor

The first First Person Shooter I ever that was set in World War 2, Medal Of Honor was a story driven first person shooter for the Playstation that kicked off a dynasty of games. With interesting stories that would not shy away from the fantastical and amazing gameplay, the game reigned supreme for a decent few years as the -best- shooter out there, until it was dethroned by other, more refined and new releases. Eventually having to struggle to keep up, rather than lead the charge, Medal Of Honor eventually faded from existence.

How will it fare in the ring however? Will it use this chance to rise up and seize fame once more? Lets find out!

Realism: 3/10. With a more arcadesque feel and clearly flirting with the fantastical, realism takes a secondary role in the early adaptions of the film. Despite the realism of the situations you are initially thrown into, and one of the few shooters that touched on the stealth aspect of the resistance movements against the Nazis, you have to admit that realism gets thrown out of the window when you end up fighting robo nazis and knights.

Story: 8/10. The first FPS to feature an actual gripping story, the first games of Medal of Honor were a fresh take at shoot em ups. With mostly realistic and down to earth missions and stories, it is safe to assume that what they did was lay the groundwork all other FPS games would take and improve upon.

Multiplayer: 5/10. It is the basic multiplayer one could expect back in the day lets be honest. It offered various skins to run around as, some humorous others from the game, and the gist of is it just to run around and shoot others to win the match.

Gameplay: 8/10. Interesting levels, responsive shooting even if a bit linear in its design. Not much to say, what this game does, it does perfectly and in my opinion still holds up to this day.

Oh Yeah CoD has Zombie Modes!

Call Of Duty

The old king on the throne of First Person Shooters everywhere. Yes, he is old, outdated and has a long list of contenders, but he is still the king (though admittedly not for long). Call Of Duty, like Battlefield and Medal Of Honor started out as WW2 games, but what Call of Duty did, was essentially take the mechanic of aiming down the sights from Battlefield and put it in a linear story driven experience like Medal Of Honor. With brutal realism (to some extend), gripping gameplay, amazing sound and music design and breathtaking cutscenes, Call Of Duty hit the ground running when it entered the scene, and has managed to be on top to this day. However, with every year, the innovations seem to stagnate, and one can recycle the same tricks so many times before they do not work. Will this be enough for the tussle however?

Realism: 7/10. Though the game started strong, with some great (if a bit horrifyingly so) realistic moments of the nature of WW2, the game started to become less of a realistic shooter and more of a "USA Patriotic Gun Porn" type of game. Despite that, one cannot argue that even to this day, the developers still manage to deliver gritty realism, even if the context is now way out of the bounds of what makes sense.

Story: 6/10. Modern Warfare 1-2 excluded, story is -not- the strong suit of the Call Of Duty series. At their best, they are just passable stories done well, along the lines set by Medal Of Honor. At their worst they are a mess of unreasonable, dumb and predictable series of events that are just an excuse to shoot -everything-. Why not lower? Because of the gems that are Modern Warfare 1 and 2 (Masterpieces of games, check em out).

Multiplayer: 2/10. |But John, Call Of Duty is known for its multiplayer, are you sure its not higher?". YES! Call Of Duty's multiplayer is shit. Take a few steps back and you will see. Is it fun? Sure, I guess, but that does not mean it is good. Running around flailing your gun like a maniac just to unlock sprees and bomb the map or whatever, is brainless. Sure, it can be fun, but the Tussle has standards and CoD does not meet them.

Gameplay: 9/10. Another reason that works as a detriment to the dumb brainless Multiplayer of the game is the gameplay. With the care they got into to ensure as much realism as they can get while still having the game be fun, the gameplay is -amazing-. There is a reason why every first person shooter and their mother started copying Call Of Duty. Because with gameplay this innovative, it stands to reason why they dominated the scene for so long.

AND THE WINNER IS:

Counter Strike: Global Offensive.

Like a good burger, a good game does not need to have a ton of sauce, it just needs to be -good-. Counter Strike: Global Offensive (CS:GO) is a very simple game in its core and initially masks itself as an arcade team shooter, but you will be woefully mistaken.

As a matter of fact, CS:GO is the most realistic FPS out there right now, and I will fight anyone who claims otherwise. Why? Because:

a) The fact that every weapon has a careful "spray" of bullets that is affected by whether or not you are moving, standing or jumping
b) It is a -team- game, meaning that co-operation is key, and running around the map full sprint and shooting while strafing COD style is discouraged (via multiple bullet wounds in the face)
c) Jumping, running and being shot, affects your movement and aim, and you cannot restore your vitality, meaning that essentially you are doing your best -not- to get shot
d) Every weapon has different stopping power (damage) making it better, or worse depending on the situation at hand (a cheap low damage SMG in a close corridor is way more effective than a high damaging expensive auto-sniper in certain situations)
e) The game rewards calm, calculating and precise gameplay where staying cool under pressure and fire, will win even impossible odds, while losing your cool will -always- doom you.

All those reasons combine manage to not only outshine the few odd mishaps of physics, not only manage to make it the most realistic shooter in the market -PERIOD- but also make it the most -tactical- shooter in the market.
Seeing all this it stands to no surprise why CS:GO is a titan of E-SPORTS while Call Of Duty is not.

If COD is King, then CS:GO is that wealthy powerful noble, who knows that no matter who is in the throne, his position is unquestionable and undisputed. (For now).

Share this