Really GS, the same key points in this game deserve a 9.0 but in MoH deserve a 7.5? What are you smoking?
But having played and finished both games in under 5 hours I simply can't understand (once more) your reviewing system.
- CoD has (again) a really short campaign, same as MoH.
- It has really good graphics, are they that superior to MoH? I personally don't think so.
- It has (once again) a really good multiplayer mode. But so does MoH, although MoH MP is a bit more hard to get a hand of at first, but that makes it all the more challenging.
And that's about everything you can compare in these two FPS games.
So why the 1.5 difference? I really have no idea.
You've been consistently putting out poorly made reviews with questionable methodology.
I think it's time you take a look at what players are saying, because it's clear we the players (at least the majority that contributes with reviews) don't agree with you.
This game is really good don't be mistaken about it, but it's not that far apart from MoH. I don't have an issue with the 9.0 given to CoD:BO. I have a BIG issue with the 7.5 given to MoH when in reality they are very similar.
Cheers