Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: General Battuta on October 04, 2010, 11:12:02 pm
-
Multiplayer impressions:
It's awful, don't waste your time. Uses many of the same interface assets as Bad Company 2; has smaller more linear maps, less interesting ballistics, and is generally boring. Think of it as Bad Company .05 with killstreaks.
-
Multiplayer Medal of Honor has always felt really clunky in general.
Hell, SINGLE player Medal of Honor has always felt clunkier than the Call of Duty equivalent.
-
Hell, SINGLE player Medal of Honor has always felt clunkier than the Call of Duty equivalent.
QFT.
jump + aim left + aim right + aim up + aim down + don't press the trigger to hard and too long = you are a frikking nazi killer!
-
Wow, you guys are way off in oblivious land. This is a series reboot by a new developer, and the multiplayer is by DICE of Battlefield fame (you can tell because of how many Bad Company 2 interface assets it reuses!). Judging it on the merits of past Medal of Honor titles is misguided.
Condemn it own its own, brand new rebooted faults instead.
-
Hell, SINGLE player Medal of Honor has always felt clunkier than the Call of Duty equivalent.
QFT.
jump + aim left + aim right + aim up + aim down + don't press the trigger to hard and too long = you are a frikking nazi killer!
I meant more of the "If you're not aiming down the sights, don't even bother!" combined with the "We won't let you move while you're aiming down the sights either!" that always pissed me off.
Has that actually changed? If not, it's still one of the faults. If yes, I'll find something new to rag on.
-
Personally, I was looking forward to the single player part of this game. I really like the angle they've taken, and hopefully they won't **** it up and insult the memory of the guys and girls over there.
Mate of mine told me multi was pretty uninteresting when the beta or whatever first came out on box, and since then I've planned to walk into EB with $120, buy the game, finish the campaign, and walk back in to have my $120 refunded seven days from purchase.
-
Openish beta's out on Steam.
-
I just flashed back...
Saw myself TRYING to play the "parachute" version.... :ick:
-
Personally, I was looking forward to the single player part of this game. I really like the angle they've taken, and hopefully they won't **** it up and insult the memory of the guys and girls over there.
Mate of mine told me multi was pretty uninteresting when the beta or whatever first came out on box, and since then I've planned to walk into EB with $120, buy the game, finish the campaign, and walk back in to have my $120 refunded seven days from purchase.
man, the BETA was rather BETA-y in that the networking wasn't that good, though some of that could have been the fact that there were less than 30 servers populated when I played, but the basic mechanics felt as good as any shooter I play on ps3, moving, ADS while walking, sniping all worked decently.
the scale is smaller than BC2, but it also has same number of players, the mission mode is a little more fun than BC2 rush mode, easier to help team.
and goddam, that cruise missile is sight to behold.
nothing like previous iterations, I have hopes my beta issues were beta issues and hope this will be great.
even though between TDU2, BO, GT5, reach, SC2, early next year's crysis2, and i forget what else, and STALKER (even with 15h, it's still like new, no modz yet!), I have too many cool games to really play/buy this fall/winter still.
-
The campaign may well be worth your time. It's by a different developer and may even be on a different engine.
-
Yes, the single player engine is UT3 and multiplayer is Frostbite
Also, they are developed by 2 different developers (Danger Close for SP, DICE for multi) so they could play completely differently. Also, for once, the campaign may not be sacrificed for the sake of multiplayer.
-
I liked multiplayer. It seemed rather realistic while still being quite action oriented.
Then again, I didn't play BC2,
-
I liked multiplayer. It seemed rather realistic while still being quite action oriented.
Then again, I didn't play BC2,
You know that feeling you get where there are round about six different rocks that you could camp behind, and you go to one of them every time you respawn?
That doesn't happen in BC2.
-
I really like the angle they've taken, and hopefully they won't **** it up and insult the memory of the guys and girls over there.
I remembering reading a lot about people worrying over that.
-
Yeah, that's the huge risk with doing this over a war that's still raging and still has people coming back in caskets from it. They've made a huge effort to get it right though, I understand.
-
Oh I bet they've done it right. My favorite part of the demo was winning rounds as the
Taliban OpFor and telling those damn imperialists to get out of our homes! We repelled the Soviets and we'll repel these unbelievers too!
-
Oh I bet they've done it right. My favorite part of the demo was winning rounds as the Taliban OpFor and telling those damn imperialists to get out of our homes! We repelled the Soviets and we'll repel these unbelievers too!
But we aren't in Pakistan yet, how can we get out of thier homes? :confused:
-
Oh I bet they've done it right. My favorite part of the demo was winning rounds as the Taliban OpFor and telling those damn imperialists to get out of our homes! We repelled the Soviets and we'll repel these unbelievers too!
But we aren't in Pakistan yet, how can we get out of thier homes? :confused:
kasnap
-
Okay, friend got the game and brought it over. Then left it here since he lives two doors down the hall anyway.
Impressions:
Single Player: I really enjoyed it. The story isn't the most interesting story you could tell in a war game, but it presents it well, and it got all the stuff right that no one else ever does. Lots of little things. Sprinting and dropping to a crouch slides you into cover. Reloading a weapon before you run out of ammo gives you a full clip plus one in the chamber. SEAL operators in Afghanistan do actually grow beards and dress like that. Supressors really don't help all that much unless there's some other environmental factor helping. The combat chatter is realistic (to the best of my knowledge) and believable. The weapons are all (mostly) different, and varied enough to make each one unique. Even though the story didn't grip me with an iron fist of interest, I could relate to characters, and managed to make me care enough to know who's who. The long range sniping was a real pain in the ass until I discovered the thermal settings, and then it got really awesome. I think my biggest gripe was that it still has the unfortunately necessary ridiculously huge enemy armies that the squad slogs through relentlessly, however justified. Oh, and the campaign actually calls the OpFor the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and (by nationality, still Al Qaeda by faction) Chechens. Kudos for the guts to kick political correctness in its face, Danger Close.
Multiplayer: OH DEAR GOD WHY?!?! It's a steaming pile of ****. You can't go prone, all the maps are ridiculously penned in, the two sides are literally identical in all but skins. Seriously, the M16A4/M203 is NOT identical to the ****ing AK-47. It doesn't even come with a fully automatic setting anymore! Compared to the singe player, the HUD and interfaces are hideous and annoying to read. Snipers dominate matchmaking, and death to anyone who dares try otherwise. The maps, individully, look good. But then you realize that they're governed by that retarded "don't leave this box, or both sides will kill you!" mechanic to make them look bigger than they are. And they're piled high with insurmountable-chest-high-walls that don't make any sense at all to be insurmountable. And THEN you get ridiculous sightlines that are absolutely a dream for sniping. Plus, an enemy on Hard in the campaign has roughly double the health you do in multi. Four shots with an M21 on single player to drop one with no headshot. Two to kill a player in multi. Just about the only cool thing to come out of this steaming pile is the ability to choose what kind of killstreak you want, offensive or defensive. Offensive are stuff like mortars, missiles, you know, explodey stuff. The other is match grade ammo to do more damage, flak jackets to take less damage, UAVs and jammers. The dynamic when you have to choose between the two for each killstreak bonus is interesting. But that's all that's interesting. And they call the Taliban and Al Qaeda OpFor. Way to not be awesome.
-
Oh, and the campaign actually calls the OpFor the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and (by nationality, still Al Qaeda by faction) Chechens. Kudos for the guts to kick political correctness in its face, Danger Close.
If you apply this term to everything it means nothing. There was never any dispute about using Taliban, Al Qaeda or anything related in single player, thus Danger Close deserves no kudos in particular for this.
-
Hmm, sounds like I should play single player.
-
It's a shame they made DICE do the MP over the course of about 6 months, because if they took the SP engine and mechanics over, it would have been different, as opposed to new modes and much less destruction version of bad co. deuce (which *is* my favourite online FPS for console ATM, but I don't want just a reskin)